Hi, On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 3:01 PM Josh Boyer <jwboyer at redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 5:35 AM Alfredo Moralejo Alonso > <amoralej at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > With the refocus of CentOS to Stream, i think it'd make sense to open > the discussion about the missing subpackages (mainly devel ones) in the > repos. > > > > While I understand that this was part of the idea of a "pure clone" of > RHEL when working with CentOS Linux, now that stream is more intended to be > used by devel community and not as a pure rebuild, I think there are > reasons to change this policy. > > > > What'd be the best way to open this discussion?, is it being discussed > already?, should this be a topic for the board? > > This is indeed a great question and yes, we are already discussing it > internally. To be quite frank, we've been discussing it for quite > some time and long before the CentOS Linux announcement. There is a > balance to be struck between making CentOS Stream a viable platform > for ecosystem development, and faithfully representing what will > become the next RHEL minor release. > > To date CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream have both stuck to "we provide > what RHEL provides" so that anyone consuming them gets parity with > RHEL. This benefits users that have a mixed RHEL/CentOS environment, > and developers targeting the next release of RHEL by using CentOS > Stream because they build against what RHEL has available. It > prevents them from inadvertently getting themselves into situations > where an application or package may build on a CentOS flavor, but fail > to run on RHEL due to missing dependencies or, less noticable, running > against unsupported content. > > Putting all "unsupported" content in a separated -unsupported repo which would be disabled by default could be a suitable solution (similar to current Devel but automatically populated with unshipped content on each new build). > However, we have seen, and I have personally evaluated, MANY requests > for some of the unshipped packages for what are very valid reasons. > By working with the CentOS team, we have slowly adjusted our default > approach to these requests and we're continuing to evolve it. I will > be working further with them to figure out how best to strike this > balance, particularly in light of CentOS Stream 9 coming and the > increased emphasis on using that directly for RHEL development. > > I can promise no timelines and we have nothing concrete to share at > the moment, but please know we're taking this seriously and the > information the community is providing on what use cases they are > trying to solve is actually critical to coming up with the right > solutions. The more we know about how our users leverage our projects > and products, the better we can make them. Thanks in advance for your > patience. > > Is there any ticket (bugzilla or whatever) where I could track the progress of the discussions? Thanks for the info! Alfredo josh > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20210121/50d89a32/attachment-0005.html>