Dne 21.9.2016 v 16:59 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a): > Anyway --> is something like that acceptable upstream? I have patches for > it already (this would require copying branches within existing git > repositories). There is plan B: propose this patches but add options > turning this behavior on/off, whatever default we'll choose.
Patches against what? This originate in fedpkg and fedora dist-git. Copr-dist-git and copr-fedpkg already has some difference, but I do not want to differ even more. Imho this should be discussed with Fedora-infra and maintainer of fedpkg. > While we are on that, could we discuss renaming from 'epel-*' to > 'centos-*'? Because we don't tell the truth entirely if we claim those are > epel-* chroots. ??? Epel chroot does not mean RHEL. It means EPEL, which is "high quality set of additional packages for Enterprise Linux, including, but not limited to, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), CentOS and Scientific Linux (SL), Oracle Linux (OL). " On the other hand, the name "centos-*" would imply that it is just CentOS, without additional repos. Which is not true. It may have sense if we add "centos-*" beside the "epel-*", but there is no demand for that. And it will likely just confuse people. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys _______________________________________________ copr-devel mailing list -- copr-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to copr-devel-le...@lists.fedorahosted.org
