On 05-07-15 23:13, Gordan Bobic wrote: > On 2015-07-05 21:54, Jacco Ligthart wrote: >>>> >>>> the 'branding' part was meant for items which had branding issues. >>>> IIRC this should now hold 4 different cases of <vendor>.pool.ntp.org >>>> (ntp, chrony, ipa and system-config-date), indexhtml and probably some >>>> items where I debranded the update and did not bother with the base >>>> RPM (firefox comes to mind). >>>> To me it looks a bit strange that we have now some redsleeve-* RPMS in >>>> there. >>> >>> It's what came rsynced down from your repository. >> >> uhm, no :) >> I guess they came from here: >> http://ftp.redsleeve.org/pub/el7-devel/el7-branding/ >> which is outside of my tree. > > Oh, _those_! :) > Isn't branding the right place for those? > >>>> It would be my choice to put redsleeve-* items in extras >>> >>> redsleeve-release is in branding, which seems reasonable to me. >>> Or am I missing something here? >> >> In the end I don't care much, as long as all RPMs are there. >> It's just that I think of 'extra' as "stuff that we added', which of >> course should include redsleeve-* things. (it also does have >> redsleeve-bookmarks and redsleeve-logos) > > Hmm... It's technically not _new_ packages, it's replacements > for the centos-* packages.
Could also be, but then they belong in 'changed'. > >> On the other hand my interpretation of 'branding' is/was 'things still >> to debrand' or 'folder that should be empty by the time of GA' > > Oh... I thought it was stuff that has already been rebranded... nope, the rebranded stuff all went into changed. I did not make a distinction there between 'changes due to other arch' and 'changes due to branding'. > Where does that leave us? Are there some packages that I need > to remove? > Don't think so. besides the 2 redsleeve-* items, there are now RPMs from 6 SRPMs. 4 of which are the ntp issue, where we decided that we would wait for the pool.ntp.org guys. (assuming that centos people don't mind that we use their pool) 1 is firefox, which has a rebranded version in updates. this one could be removed or we could put the update here. I don't think anyone cares because this is effectively not going to be installed anywhere. the last 1 is centos-indexhtml. This one should have been rebranded IMHO. but at this time I don't think we can take it out. it would break firefox and lynx. Jacco _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users
