On 28/04/2021 22:09, Davide Cavalca via CentOS-devel wrote: > Hello, > > Fabian suggested to post about https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/306 > so we can have a wider discussion around it. That ticket is > specifically for the Hyperscale SIG, but I think this is something that > could be generally useful. > > Within Hyperscale, we have a need to build a few packages that have > dependencies coming from EPEL. While we could rebuild those > dependencies within the SIG, that seems both wasteful and undesirable, > as it would lead to needless deviation and potentially discourage folks > from maintaining stuff in EPEL (where it has a chance to benefit the > most people). So, our conclusion was that it would be great to just > depend directly on EPEL and have it added to our build targets in CBS > so we can build against it. > > One concern with doing this is that EPEL is kind of a moving target. > This doesn't really apply to Hyperscale (as we track CentOS Stream), > but it could be relevant for SIGs tracking CentOS Linux. Still, this > would just be a non-default option for a SIG to add to their build > tags, so I don't think this will be much of a problem in practice. > > From my chat with Fabian I understand this was raised in the past and > there had been policy concerns around it. I'd love to get more context > around this and see if we can get them addressed. Alternatively, if > there are no concerns I'd be happy to entertain suggestions on how to > actually do this :) Thanks! > > Cheers > Davide Just some links to previous threads about this : https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2015-September/050896.html https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2016-April/051678.html https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2019-July/054614.html So worth reading the three threads and then revisit it maybe ? :) -- Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab