(Second) gentle reminder that the second question below has not been
addressed yet. Any thoughts? Thanks for taking your time!
It'd also be helpful if anybody can provide any information on who I
need to ping to get a decision on that matter. Thanks!
On 27/01/2023 12.38, Peter Georg wrote:
> Gentle reminder that the second question below has not been addressed
> yet. Any thoughts? Thanks for taking your time.
>
>
> On 15/12/2022 00.04, Peter Georg wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
> <snip>
>>
>> The second open question concerns the centos-release-* packages
>> provided by SIGs to allow users to easily consume SIGs' content. For
>> 8s and 9s the CBS tags
>> extras<el>-extras-common-{candidate,testing,release} are used to build
>> these packages. This repository is added in CentOS Stream 8 and 9.
>> For packages build for RHEL 8 and 9 there is currently no common way
>> to provide any means of easing the process to consume SIGs' content.
>> My proposal to fix this is by adding
>> extras<el>-extras-common-{candidate,testing,release} for <el> = 8 and
>> 9, i.e., using the same system as currently used for 8s and 9s.
>>
>> To further ease the process I propose to introduce a package named
>> centos-release-extras which contains the repository config pointing to
>> the content of the tags extras<el>-extras-common-{testing,release}
>> (only -release enabled by default) and the CentOS-SIG-Extras GPG key.
>> The centos-release-extras packages itself would be built in the
>> extras<el>-extras-common-el<el> build target. Users of RHEL would then
>> only need to install this single package to allow them to easily
>> install any other centos-release-* packages. Obviously someone needs
>> to maintain the centos-release-extras package. I volunteer to maintain
>> this package.
>>
>>
>> [1]: https://git.centos.org/centos/board/issue/82
>> [2]: https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/1002