On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> On 04/11/2018 03:13 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>> It may cause pain to current RHEL ansible users, but I think that the
>>> EPEL package needs to be renamed to something like "ans
Re-adding epel-devel as I was previously not a member and received a
rejection notice.
Thank you,
Terry Bowling
Sr. Technical Product Manager - RHEL Systems Mgmt
Red Hat, Inc.
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 6:58 AM, Terry Bowling wrote:
> Hopefully I can help provide some clarity on this topic, thoug
On 11 April 2018 at 20:32, Dylan Silva wrote:
> I am very afraid I am jumping into a lion's den here... However, I am going
> to try to alleviate some concerns.
>
> Our move from EPEL to Extras was actually to solve for the needs of RHEL and
> the RHEL System Roles. We needed to be in a channel
I am very afraid I am jumping into a lion's den here... However, I am going to
try to alleviate some concerns.
Our move from EPEL to Extras was actually to solve for the needs of RHEL and
the RHEL System Roles. We needed to be in a channel that customers could
consume from that wasn't EPEL.
On 11 April 2018 at 10:02, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:43 AM, Alexander Bokovoy
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not in Ansible engineering or product management so take this with a
>> grain of salt. My understanding is that cadence of Ansible releases and
>> its aggressiveness in API
On 11 April 2018 at 14:30, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 04/11/2018 04:52 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>
>>
>> Especially if EPEL7 now has a clash with an optional repo that is available
>> to all subscribers...
>>
>> There are priority or exclude filters people will need to add to their yum
>> repository c
On 04/11/2018 04:52 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
>
> Especially if EPEL7 now has a clash with an optional repo that is available
> to all subscribers...
>
> There are priority or exclude filters people will need to add to their yum
> repository configurations that they may not be otherwise aware of
On 04/10/2018 11:05 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> At this point, no offense to Nirik and the maintenance he does on the
> package, I'm actually tempted to just grab it from upstream directly at
> https://releases.ansible.com/ansible/rpm/
Feel free. Do whatever you feel is best for you.
>
> At leas
On 04/11/2018 02:04 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> There probably should be an announcement sent to the epel announce
> list then it gets to a wider audience so more people know this.
Yep. But the RH announcement only went out monday, and I am at a
hackfest this week. I'll try and get something out t
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 10:05 Peter Robinson, wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:58 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> > James Hogarth wrote:
> >> I was under the impression that as of 2.4.0 in EL7 we removed ansible
> >> from EPEL7 since Red Hat included it in their extras repo, and EPEL
> >> policy is
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:58 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> James Hogarth wrote:
>> I was under the impression that as of 2.4.0 in EL7 we removed ansible
>> from EPEL7 since Red Hat included it in their extras repo, and EPEL
>> policy is not to conflict.
>>
>> I was surprised just now to see ansible
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 01:26 Todd Zullinger, wrote:
> James Hogarth wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 00:59 Todd Zullinger, wrote:
> >> Red Hat announced today that Ansible was being deprecated
> >> from the extras channel. Their advice is that those who
> >> have "previously installed Ansible and
James Hogarth wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 00:59 Todd Zullinger, wrote:
>> Red Hat announced today that Ansible was being deprecated
>> from the extras channel. Their advice is that those who
>> have "previously installed Ansible and its dependencies from
>> the Extras channel are advised to ena
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 01:13 James Hogarth, wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 00:59 Todd Zullinger, wrote:
>
>> James Hogarth wrote:
>> > I was under the impression that as of 2.4.0 in EL7 we removed ansible
>> > from EPEL7 since Red Hat included it in their extras repo, and EPEL
>> > policy is no
James Hogarth wrote:
> I was under the impression that as of 2.4.0 in EL7 we removed ansible
> from EPEL7 since Red Hat included it in their extras repo, and EPEL
> policy is not to conflict.
>
> I was surprised just now to see ansible 2.5.0 on a test centos system,
> when it wasn't in extras, and
15 matches
Mail list logo
