-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 07:40 +0000, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 22 January 2018 at 02:12, R P Herrold <herr...@owlriver.com> wrote:
> [..]
> > > If it is common in case of EL7/EL6 EPEL packages consumers it is perfect
> > > reason to not bother EPEL on master branch because Fedora has noting out
> > > from such end users and keeping all EL6/EL7 adjustments are only slowing
> > > down Fedora development by making specs less readable.
> >
> > Tomasz
> >
> > Do you have statistics about the number of packages
> > 'migrating' from Fedoraproject to RHEL, vs the number of EPEL
> > packages doing the same
>
> In case RHEL .. nope.
> I've already been thinking about this however as I have no access to
> devel RHEL source I cannot do this.
> In case of EPEL packages as I already wrote flow of new/updated
> packages to EPEL is minute compare to Fedora in recent months.
> EPEL/EL7 has ~6.5k src.rpm were Fedora ~20k. Using this as reference
> pints would be possible to expect that EPEL/EL7 flow should be around
> 1/4 of Fedora, but it is not like this.
> EPEL/EL7 flow is way lower.
>
> I can only guess that generally as RH is doing major update every few
> years watching constantly on Fedora for RH people does not make to
> much sense for them.
> Best would be first hand some opinion someone from RH.
> Still I hope that this tread will be read by someone from RH ..
>
> > It is all well and good to have a fast moving playground
> > environment, but some (and particularly, I) actually use both
> > as sources for solving needs of paying customers
>
> Problem only is that as Fedora is on the constant move but RH doesn't.
> Main RH goal is delivery solid distro, then security fixes and some
> other critical fixes. Only occasionally they are updating some set of
> packages.
> Just had a look on CentOS updates and I've took zsh src.rpm.
> Spec from this package does not look at all like Fedora.
> Last Fedora entry in %changelog is from 2013.
> From this point in Fedora has been made about 30 changes than RH has
> only 3 and there have not been copied from Fedora.
> I've checked next few packages and situation looks the same.
>
> So looks like RH already few years ago stopped using Fedora as set of
> reference packages.
>
> > and EPEL, for me, is the more fruitful one from which to build
> > solutions on top of CentOS (and not Fedora's more short lived,
> > properly 'not concerned' about long term supportability
> > offerings)
>
> In EPEL/EL7 is 6551 source packages. After remove %{rhel} <5 and
> convert this to %{el6}/%{el7} it will be possible more precise to say
> how many packages rally has for example el7 %ifings.
> Compare those two numbers may deliver new data about EPEL health.
> I would be not surprised if number of src.rpm packages will be
> significantly greater than %{el7} %ifings which will be some kind of
> sign that EPEL health on top of Fedora packages is not so good as many
> people are thinking.
>
> What I'm worry it is that this supportability is only kind of fata
> morgana/ilution and RH effectively spitted long time ago from Fedora
> without telling about this to Fedora developers.
> More and more small evidences says me that it may be truth.
> In other case it would be possible to see as well kind of RH feedback
> about some crucial Fedora changes.
> Simple I cannot find traces of such discussions (however maybe I'm
> looking in wrong place).
> Other fact which may cut this knot is volume EPEL related bugs/issues
> reported over bugzilla.
Note that RHEL/CentOS doesn't have to copy specs 1:1. AFAIK it never was that
specs were 100% same. However, I'm pretty sure that "branching" RHEL is
happening from Fedora.
> Nevertheless I think that 2 out of my 8 points are ready to PRs.
> As it will take some time to raise->approve->finish those changes
> still is a lot of time to colect more facts and make some decisions
> about other 6 points.
>
> PS. If you have any propositions to do some analyse as I'm every day
> syncing not only Fedora but few other distros packages (+all Fedora
> git repos and Debian sources as well) it is easier for me to execute
> some oneliner to produce some numbers.
- --
- -Igor Gnatenko
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=jSKU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
