[CentOS-devel] Balancing the needs around the CentOS platform

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 6:05 PM Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/19/20 1:25 PM, Mark Mielke wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 4:15 PM Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> CentOS point releases are more like source control tags than branches.
> >> If you have only used CentOS and not RHEL, then I can see why you might
> >> be confused about this point.  You are accurately describing CentOS.
> > This is false. I don't think you understand the RHEL release process.
> > Check my other post. Red Hat has internal branching that you were
> > unaware of (apparently), and CentOS is using the later branch, not the
> > earlier branch.
> Sure, but this conversation isn't about the specific mechanics of RHEL's
> branching.  Matthew pointed out that minor releases of RHEL are
> branches, and that CentOS releases have no branches.  Nico made an
> inaccurate analogy to VCS tags and branches.  Matthew is correct,
> though: RHEL major releases have branches and CentOS releases do not.
> (Or, they have just one branch.  Whatever phrasing you prefer.)

The problem with this conclusion, is that you are ignoring the reality
of approximately (in the example of something reaching RHEL X.Y):

1) RHEL Master (days?) -> RHEL X.N+2 Staging  (weeks to months)-> RHEL
X.N+1 Staging or Beta (weeks to months) -> RHEL X.N Stable (weeks to
months) -> CentOS X.N Stable (weeks to months)

And the claim of several people on this is that the following is "no big deal":

1) RHEL Master (days?) -> CentOS X Stream (days?)

So you can say that CentOS only has one branch - but that is only if
you ignore what processes and gates existed prior to that branch. I
think the conclusion that CentOS 7 was just one branch is misleading
at the very least, and false in the only picture that matters.

-- 
Mark Mielke <mark.mielke at gmail.com>