On 2015-07-05 22:54, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
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'.
I understand (at long last!).
I have moved redsleeve-* packages over to the changed folder.
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 have removed that firefox package now.
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.
Ah, this is kind of important. I'll try to build a replacement package
for that one tonight. It is quite an obvious and thus important one.
Gordan
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users
