Combination of 1 and 2: we need to find a way to collaborate with the author more closely to get outstanding PRs merged.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 8:28 AM Matthias Dellweg <dell...@atix.de> wrote: > Hi all, > in the ansible-pulp role (that is meant to install pulp) we use a role > to install the postgresql db-server from galaxy named > ansible-role-postgres. > Sadly the upstream version of this role is missing fedora30 support, > and the PR for this has not been merged for a long time. > This leads to ansible-pulp using a clone of this role, which is > hosted on github in a personal namespace and is missing debian10 support > respectively. > This sounds to me like a kind of short term workaround, but it is in > place for almost half a year now. > > I see several ways to move this forward: > > 1)Leave it as is, wait for upstream. > pros: nothing to do (now) > cons: no good debian support > 2)Use upstream role and add fedora30 config like debian10 config [0] > pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role > cons: ugly workaround > 3)Use upstream, and drop fedora30 support for now > pros: no need to maintain a clone of the role > cons: seems quite obvious? > 4)Maintain a clone of the role in the pulp namespace with a team of > committers > pros: most flexibility, fedora30 & debian10 support > cons: extra maintainance work > > (The order is random, and the numbers are only for future references. I > do not want to express a personal preference this way.) > > Matthias > > [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulplift/pull/45 > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev