Am 03.12.21 um 02:12 schrieb Josh Boyer:
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 4:29 PM Leon Fauster via epel-devel
wrote:
Am 02.12.21 um 19:49 schrieb Carl George:
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal for
our
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 4:29 PM Leon Fauster via epel-devel
wrote:
>
> Am 02.12.21 um 19:49 schrieb Carl George:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
> >>
> >> In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new
> >> proposal for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout.
Am 02.12.21 um 19:49 schrieb Carl George:
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal for
our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to explain
things like that, it got a little
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal
> for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to
> explain things like that, it got a little confusing. Carl and I had a good
> video
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 5:26 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 20. 11. 21 v 0:04 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
> > Do we keep everything in epel9-next until RHEL9 GA and then do a mass
> > branch over and mass rebuild? (Plan A)
>
> And again with 9.1 GA? And again with 9.2 GA? // I do not expect answer,
Dne 20. 11. 21 v 0:04 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
Do we keep everything in epel9-next until RHEL9 GA and then do a mass branch
over and mass rebuild? (Plan A)
And again with 9.1 GA? And again with 9.2 GA? // I do not expect answer, just pointing that minor releases should be
part of the solution.
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 2:16 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 18. 11. 21 v 20:31 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
> > - epel9-next stays the way it is currently setup.
>
> Ehm, what is the current setup?
>
>
Sorry about that. You are correct. I didn't say how epel9-next is
currently setup.
It is currently
Dne 18. 11. 21 v 20:31 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
- epel9-next stays the way it is currently setup.
Ehm, what is the current setup?
And mainly, when I build something in EPEL next, something not compatible with EPEL. How it gets to EPEL when next RHEL
9.x gets released? I see nothing relevant
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal
> for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to
> explain things like that, it got a little confusing. Carl and I had a good
> video
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 3:04 PM Mohan Boddu wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> > In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal
> > for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to
> > explain things like
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:14 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 11:31:42AM -0800, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal
> > for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to
> > explain things like
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:04 PM Mohan Boddu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
> >
> > In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new
> proposal for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best
> way to explain things like that, it
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal
> for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to
> explain things like that, it got a little confusing. Carl and I had a good
> video
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 3:12 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> ..snip...
> >
> > ** Plan A Cons:
> > - complexity and added work of mass branch and mass rebuild
> > - mass rebuild will have a moderate rate of failure due to buildroot
> > differences (unshipped devel packages)
>
> So, I had this question:
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:32 PM Troy Dawson wrote:
>
> In our last EPEL Steering Committee meeting, Carl brought up a new proposal
> for our epel9 / epel9-next rollout. Sometimes IRC isn't the best way to
> explain things like that, it got a little confusing. Carl and I had a good
> video
15 matches
Mail list logo
