[CentOS] Version numbering vis a vis CentOS and RHEL

Mon Dec 7 15:52:35 UTC 2015
John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk>

On Mon, 7 Dec 2015, Phelps, Matthew wrote:

> - Coordination of other repositories (e.g. EPEL) is based on the "version",
> how does that work now?

Exactly the same as it did before.  Before you'd have a $maj.$min repo, which
is the same as it is now.  maj=7 min=1.1503

You can park it there and not suffer any problems as I understand it.  At
least that's what I've done with 7.  So when 7.2 finally hits, it'll be maj=7

> All of these things ran in parallel with the RHEL release cycle, and the
> work could be done at the same time. That was the overriding philosophy of
> CentOS, "we are a recompile of RHEL." Now, the impression is (rightly or
> wrongly, it doesn't matter to me) CentOS is totally becoming a separate
> Linux distro, and needs to be treated as such. And that has huge
> implications for system administrators in a large environment. Huge.

I don't see it as an issue.  A partially updated (without touching CR) 7.1.X
is equivalent to a partially update 7.1 RHEL.

> There are answers to all these questions, but there is a lot of confusion
> that's been generated by this seemingly cosmetic change in version numbers.
> I've checked, and there was no,"We're considering creating this basic
> difference from RHEL, how will this affect you?" on this list, or the
> website, etc. From our viewpoint, it was sprung on us out of nowhere, and
> now were being told "deal with it, or leave."

To me, I'm not sure I get any issues or advantages from the new scheme, but I
can't say it bothers me greatly.