Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 25 January 2018 at 08:26, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Just to illustrate what this is about, these are 3 PR trying to fix the > branches for next RHEL: > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-ruby-rc4/pull-request/1 >

Re: Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

- Mail original - De: "Tomasz Kłoczko" ? > What I'm trying to say is that IMO I probably know why up to now it was not > possible to introduce common indentation in RH and Fedora as well. > (bad news) > I know probably as well why now it will be even harder. > .. because (as result) >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Just to illustrate what this is about, these are 3 PR trying to fix the branches for next RHEL: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-ruby-rc4/pull-request/1 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-Ascii85/pull-request/1 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-nokogiri/pull-request/1

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 24 January 2018 at 11:32, Samuel Rakitničan < srakitni...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > 1) easier to test upgrades between Fedora versions > > > > As each Fedora major release may have in updates only security and > critical > > fixes and ABI (libraries SONAME changes) will be completely

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

I've tried to mostly stay out of this discussion because I to *NOT* consider myself an expert. I've been a Fedora package maintainer for several years now and have learned more than I ever thought I would but I am not: - a programmer - an expert git user - a *nix guru >From my simplistic point

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Tuesday, 23 January 2018 at 07:36, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 14:33 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 02:23:16PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > What I'm trying to say here is that each time we want to implement > > > some feature in Fedora, we either

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be > good to prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if > conditionals in (at least) master branch to allow us to develop features > faster. Thoughts? Suggestions? While I would not

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Sérgio Basto wrote: > %if 0%{?fedora} > BuildRequires: python2-six > %else > BuildRequires: python-six > %endif BuildRequires: python%{!?rhel:2}-six Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Fabio Valentini wrote: > My reasoning: > > There are many reasons why .spec files have to diverge between branches, > including for: > - mass rebuilds after branching a new fedora release, That is a limitation in rel-eng tooling: If a mass rebuild is needed after branching, it is surely needed

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> Oh it definitely does. > > I am handling mass rebuilds of Ruby packages or updates of Ruby on > Rails. This is complex task requiring touching plenty of packages. Due > to update of Rails in master, I simply cannot contact maintainers of all > packages and assuring their branches still works. I

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> Just FTR: above we have "I think" vs "in practice, it looks not like you > may think". > Real engineering is about 1) testing, 2) testing, 3) testing. > "Assumption" like, "I think" is/should be the real enemy of each > engineer. > > Stricter use of branching will have yet another effects that

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Jan 24, 2018 08:55, "Miroslav Suchý" wrote: Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good to > prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if conditionals in > (at least) master

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good to > prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if conditionals > in > (at least) master branch to allow us to develop features faster. Thoughts? >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 02:03:26PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > In the end there was basically no good argument for _not_ doing it but > every time I touch something like this someone crawls out of the > woodwork to flame me. So I end up hesitating instead of doing anything > and then I

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 14:03 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > > > > > "SB" == Sérgio Basto writes: > > SB> Can't we fix things on EPEL, to speed up Fedora devel ? > > We can try. See the macro work I've done (though the real work there > was against EPEL5, which is

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> "SR" == Samuel Rakitničan writes: SR> I think conditionals should be documented with more examples as well SR> [1], in order to minimize such bugs. Specific examples of what you'd like to see are certainly welcome. Feel free to file tickets at

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> "SB" == Sérgio Basto writes: SB> Can't we fix things on EPEL, to speed up Fedora devel ? We can try. See the macro work I've done (though the real work there was against EPEL5, which is fortunately forgotten now). SB> another story that is bugging me is python2

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 07:36 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 14:33 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 02:23:16PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > What I'm trying to say here is that each time we want to > > > implement > > > some feature in Fedora, we

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 07:36:08AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > I'd really like to see us tend towards coming up with macros that > > provide elegant fallbacks on EPEL. (The %license macro is a good > > example.) > There is no fallback for rich dependencies. There is no fallback for >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 23 January 2018 at 09:25, Vít Ondruch wrote: [..] > > Well I think maintainers should chose the ideal solution for their case. > If use of macros just complicates things too much, maybe use of branches > might make more sense. On the other hand does it really make sense

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 04:56 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 1:37 AM, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 15:58

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 1:37 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 15:58 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: >> > Yet anther thought .. >>

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 23.1.2018 v 10:09 Samuel Rakitničan napsal(a): >> Dne 22.1.2018 v 12:31 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): >> >> You took pretty basic example without context. So let me give you >> different example. >> >> There were attempts to get Ruby on Rails into EPEL. It is around 80 >> packages. Some packages

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 12:31 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Better to introduce bugs? > > mock-core-config now requires yum on Fedora because you made wrong if in > spec... > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537193 > - --

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> Dne 22.1.2018 v 12:31 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): > > You took pretty basic example without context. So let me give you > different example. > > There were attempts to get Ruby on Rails into EPEL. It is around 80 > packages. Some packages were RHEL contidiontalized. But the effort to > get Ruby

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 23.1.2018 v 03:55 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >> "VO" == Vít Ondruch writes: > VO> I think FPC does not know. > > Certainly we know what we generally try to do, but Fedora changes > quickly and some things aren't always stated as well as they could be. > Plus

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 15:58 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > Yet anther thought .. > > As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences > > using %{rhel} within

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 14:33 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 02:23:16PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > What I'm trying to say here is that each time we want to implement > > some feature in Fedora, we either need to have some

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> "VO" == Vít Ondruch writes: VO> I think FPC does not know. Certainly we know what we generally try to do, but Fedora changes quickly and some things aren't always stated as well as they could be. Plus the experts who draft the more esoteric guidelines often have other

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 20:58, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > Yet anther thought .. > > As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences > > using %{rhel} within %ifings operators like <,

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Yet anther thought .. > As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences > using %{rhel} within %ifings operators like <, <=, >, >= does not make to > much sense. That's likely true. But I think it'd be even

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 19:45, Matthew Miller wrote: [..] > This might have been a past pattern, but we (Fedora leadership working > at Red Hat, along with RH counterparts) are working to make this > better. (See the "What does Red Hat want?" talks from previous >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 19:40, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 08:07:29PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > So (quoting you) "As EPEL is the only reason I stay in Fedora" you want > to > > say that you are you are not interested at all Fedora but only some

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 20:06, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: [..] > Logic says that only %{rhel} or even better %{el6}, %{el7} (and so on) > should be in use. > Yet anther thought .. As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences using %{rhel} within

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 19:11, R P Herrold wrote: [..] > and very curiously as to 'strace' in your list, of course > there ** is no ** > '0%{?centos} >= 8 > > nor a released rhel at that number either ;) > First possible explanation is that here it is some kind of

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:38:56AM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > It happens only when next major EL release is made. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Relationship_with_Fedora > After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. This might have been a past

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 08:07:29PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > So (quoting you) "As EPEL is the only reason I stay in Fedora" you want to > say that you are you are not interested at all Fedora but only some > EL6/EPEL packages. > Is that correct? Remember that EPEL is _part of Fedora_.

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 02:23:16PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > What I'm trying to say here is that each time we want to implement > some feature in Fedora, we either need to have some replacement in > EPEL or diverge Fedora branches from EPEL branches. Having > replacement is not always

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018, Tomasz K?oczko wrote: > [tkloczko@domek SPECS.fedora]$ (for i in centos ; do echo -n "$i "; \ grep '%{?'$i * ; done) | grep -v "rhel specific macros" > ceph.spec:%if ( ( 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 7) && ! 0%{?centos} ) > ceph.spec:%if ( ( 0%{?rhel} &&

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 15:54, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko > wrote: > > > > On 22 January 2018 at 10:42, Josh Boyer > wrote: > > [..] > >> > >> > After make major release no

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 12:31 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good > > to > > prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > On 22 January 2018 at 10:42, Josh Boyer wrote: > [..] >> >> > After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. >> >> This is false. Even by your own reasoning, lots

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 10:42, Josh Boyer wrote: [..] > > After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. > > This is false. Even by your own reasoning, lots of people certainly > care in the context of the release after the current one. However >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 10:22, Mark Wielaard wrote: [..] > I think this depends on the team(s) that are maintaining the Fedora and > RHEL packages, and whether they are the same or different people. For > the packages I maintain personally in both Fedora and RHEL I make

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 22.1.2018 v 12:31 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): > Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): >> Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good >> to >> prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if conditionals >> in >> (at least) master

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 06:47:50PM +0100, Alec Leamas wrote: > > > On 20/01/18 13:52, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Jan 20, 2018 12:29, "Igor Gnatenko" > >> TL;DR: > >> - We need an authoritative source that tells us packagers which > >> Guidelines apply to

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good to > prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if conditionals > in > (at least) master branch to allow us to develop features faster. Thoughts? -1 If

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 22.1.2018 v 11:50 Florian Weimer napsal(a): > On 01/22/2018 08:40 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: >> 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

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 20.1.2018 v 14:30 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > > It would be really useful to have a wiki page outlining where the > > Guidelines for stable branches are different to the most recent > version of > > the Packaging Guidelines (if such a page already exists, please > ignore this > > and point

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 01/22/2018 09:38 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. Again, that really depends on the package. Some are not even fully branched. For some of the totally branched packages, package maintainers create separate backports of

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 01/22/2018 08:40 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: 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. It really depends on the

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 3:38 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 22 January 2018 at 07:58, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > [..] >>> On 22 January 2018 at 02:12, R P Herrold wrote: >>> [..] >>> What I'm worry it is that this

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 08:38 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Effectively Fedora has not to much from relation with RH *between* > major EL releases in form of straight contribution to Fedora constant > changes. They may be sending back some fixes done for RHEL customers > but that is all. However as

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 12:27:38PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be > good to prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if > conditionals in (at least) master branch to allow us to develop features > faster.

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 07:58, Igor Gnatenko wrote: [..] >> On 22 January 2018 at 02:12, R P Herrold wrote: >> [..] >> What I'm worry it is that this supportability is only kind of fata >> morgana/ilution and RH effectively spitted long time

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 07:40 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 22 January 2018 at 02:12, R P Herrold wrote: > [..] > > > If it is common in case of EL7/EL6 EPEL packages consumers it is perfect > > > reason to not bother EPEL

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 02:12, R P Herrold 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

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 21 January 2018 at 15:07, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 21 January 2018 at 17:26, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> >> On 20 January 2018 at 21:00, Tomasz Kłoczko >> wrote: >> > On 20 January 2018 at 23:26, Stephen John Smoogen

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018, Tomasz K?oczko 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

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 21 January 2018 at 17:26, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 20 January 2018 at 21:00, Tomasz Kłoczko > wrote: > > On 20 January 2018 at 23:26, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > [..] > >> > >> As EPEL is the only reason I stay in

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 20 January 2018 at 21:00, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 20 January 2018 at 23:26, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > [..] >> >> As EPEL is the only reason I stay in Fedora.. I would like to make >> sure it doesn't cause developers that much problems. As

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 20 January 2018 at 23:26, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: [..] > As EPEL is the only reason I stay in Fedora.. I would like to make > sure it doesn't cause developers that much problems. As such I would > be interested in seeing if the macros that Neal said could be better >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 20 January 2018 at 06:27, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > Even if people hope next version of EL will be better in this, it doesn't mean > that el6/el7 can be fixed easily. > > > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good to >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 20/01/18 13:52, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Jan 20, 2018 12:29, "Igor Gnatenko" > TL;DR: >> - We need an authoritative source that tells us packagers which >> Guidelines apply to which branch (or what has to be done differently - >> or can be done better -

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 20 January 2018 at 12:58, Richard Shaw wrote: [..] > %if 0%{?fedora} > Recommends: ... > %else > Requires: ... > %endif > > does not hurt readability much. > > WIth large libraries that are already complicated that's more difficult, > but in that case major updates are

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sat, 2018-01-20 at 13:52 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > I find it hard to track changes to the Packaging Guidelines, and when those > changes are made, they sometimes only apply to certain branches (or only to > rawhide), and it's no longer

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sat, 2018-01-20 at 06:58 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Igor Gnatenko < > ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > > * File-triggers are not supported by el6/el7 RPM, so every package which > > has > >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 7:58 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: >> >> >> * File-triggers are not supported by el6/el7 RPM, so every package which >> has >> icons should have some number of

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Igor Gnatenko < ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > * File-triggers are not supported by el6/el7 RPM, so every package which > has > icons should have some number of scriptlets conditionalized by %if > 0%{?rhel} > && 0%{?rhel} <= 7. > Could this be

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Jan 20, 2018 12:29, "Igor Gnatenko" wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello, I know that many of you like to have just one branch which builds everywhere (starting from el6), but this really slows down development of Fedora for many