On February 18, 2016 7:08:34 PM PST, Michael Stahnke
wrote:
>I was trying to reply to everything inline, but being the responsible
>posters ya'll are, you trimmed and everything leaving context harder to
>just jump in on :)
>
>Way back in the day when I had a lot more
On 02/19/2016 04:16 AM, ~Stack~ wrote:
[snip]
1. Packages will never disappear. [They don't disappear from Fedora 12
even if it is archived.. ]
To my understanding we never made this promise. We should try and
communicate why it's NOT something we promise.
Could you elaborate on this
On 02/18/2016 06:29 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 18 February 2016 at 14:13, ~Stack~ wrote:
>> On 02/18/2016 01:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:24:58 -0700
>>> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> [snip]
1. Packages will never
On 18 February 2016 at 14:13, ~Stack~ wrote:
> On 02/18/2016 01:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:24:58 -0700
>> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> [snip]
>>> 1. Packages will never disappear. [They don't disappear from Fedora 12
>>>even
On 18 February 2016 at 16:37, Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Bryan J Smith wrote:
>>
>> Dave Johansen wrote:
>> > RHSCL is a non-starter where I work (and I imagine at other
>> > locations). 2-3 years of support just isn't
Dave Johansen wrote:
> RHSCL is a non-starter where I work (and I imagine at other
> locations). 2-3 years of support just isn't enough to make it a
> worthwhile investment.
Well, there usually _is_ more than one (1) [RH]SCL per RHEL release.
So it's more like 2-3 releases that "rebase" every 2+
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Bryan J Smith wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > Sorry what I meant that it is built against all of RHEL not just a
> > couple of channels. Again this isn't a promise we ever made, but one
> > people assume we have made (and get
It appears that it's actually trivial to add %autosetup to RHEL6. You
just need the Fedora macros plus a couple of extra definitions. That's
in git now.
I don't want to push this to testing because there's another version
soaking in testing which I don't want to supersede. However, you can
On 18 February 2016 at 12:46, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 21:42:18 -0700
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>>
>> Apologies and So Forth
>>
>>
>>
>> First, I would like to apologize for the delay in
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Sorry what I meant that it is built against all of RHEL not just a
> couple of channels. Again this isn't a promise we ever made, but one
> people assume we have made (and get surprised when they find out
> differently).
I can only imagine how difficult this gets for
On 02/18/2016 01:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:24:58 -0700
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
[snip]
>> 1. Packages will never disappear. [They don't disappear from Fedora 12
>>even if it is archived.. ]
>
> To my understanding we never made this promise. We
On 18 February 2016 at 12:56, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
>> 3. Packages are built against all of an Enterprise Linux 'base' (EG
>>whatever is in CentOS/Scientific Linux base).
>
> I thought we were always clear that we built against RHEL.
> But perhaps not.
>
Sorry what I meant
On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:11:28 -0800
Joe Julian wrote:
> On February 18, 2016 11:56:54 AM PST, Kevin Fenzi
> wrote:
> >On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:24:58 -0700
> >Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >...snip...
> >
> >> 2. Packages in EPEL will
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:24:58 -0700
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
...snip...
> However during that time there have been many
> rules which it has tried to keep:
>
> 1. Do not do disruptive upgrades. Try to backport security fixes or do
>upgrades which do not change API/ABI
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 21:42:18 -0700
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> Apologies and So Forth
>
>
>
> First, I would like to apologize for the delay in getting this post
> done. I really didn't realize the amount of energy the
15 matches
Mail list logo