On 05.08.21 02:07, Carl George wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 8:28 AM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel > <centos-devel at centos.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> inspired by a different thread here, I did a dnf distro-sync on >> a CS8 node and noticed that subversion would be downgraded: >> >> from >> subversion-1.10.2-4.module_el8.3.0+703+ba2f61b7 >> to >> subversion-1.10.2-3.module_el8.3.0+393+21cd8ae8 >> >> Coming from C8 and swapping the repos to CS8 leads to this >> situation (especially when doing upgrade instead of distro-sync) >> but that is not my point. >> >> The above downgrade path recovered that subversion in CS8 still >> does not have >> >> # rpm -q --changelog >> subversion-1.10.2-4.module_el8.3.0+703+ba2f61b7.x86_64 | head -3 >> * Mi Feb 10 2021 Joe Orton <jorton at redhat.com> - 1.10.2-4 >> - add security fix for CVE-2020-17525 >> >> >> Such question comes here and there again and again. How >> does the package update process in CS8 looks like? Is the >> process mature, any glitches. This subversion update already >> exists in C8 since February. Why is it not incorporated into CS8? >> >> Would CentOS Stream only be promoted as "upstream" development >> platform, then ... but its also promoted as successor of CentOS >> Linux for people with production fleeds. >> >> I do not argue that C8S should be like C8 (in a wider sense) but >> at least it should have some basal property (like updates are at >> most after 1 or 2 month all there or so ...). >> >> >> Any insight about the goal of the current process? Any wiki or doc page >> for that? Some transparency would be my main goal, to have base for >> decisions ... >> >> I'd really appreciate any feedback. >> >> Thanks, >> Leon >> > Thanks for bringing this to our attention. This is a mistake on the > CentOS side. I verified that we should have this module build in both > c8 and c8s. I've tagged the c8 module build for the c8s compose and > it will be included in the next compose. > > I'll be blunt and say that the process for stream 8 is not mature. > There are glitches like this. It's all a byproduct of bolting on the > Stream workflows after the RHEL8 workflows were already established. > For Stream 9 the workflows are the RHEL workflows, and the RHEL > maintainers will be directly responsible for their packages. Stream 8 > is still technically a rebuild, it's just a rebuild of 8.X+1 content > instead of 8.X. The basic process for Stream 8 works something like > this. > > - RHEL maintainer creates an internal build > - Internal build passes gating tests > - RHEL maintainer attaches build to errata > - Sources exported to c8s branch on git.centos.org > - CentOS maintainer rebuilds the sources > - CentOS maintainer generates new compose and runs t_functional test > suite against it > - CentOS maintainer publishes the new compose containing the update > > It's absolutely true that the end goal is for CentOS to become the > upstream of RHEL. It's also true that it is a work in progress. Thank you for the honest reply ... I am already looking into CS9 and hopefully the signed packages will be published this month. -- Leon