Re: a diversion into EPEL [was Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like]

2016-12-09 Thread Przemek Klosowski
On 12/09/2016 11:17 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: For other software, where users would like the version to match more closely the long lifecycle, maybe there could be a hand-off from Fedora version to CentOS version. Yeah, hand-offs would be a great feature for the users. Right now, it's tricky to

Re: a diversion into EPEL [was Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like]

2016-12-09 Thread Josh Boyer
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > On Dec 9, 2016 5:18 PM, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 11:07:32AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: >> > Anyways, in the big picture, while I don't speak for everyone on

Re: a diversion into EPEL [was Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like]

2016-12-09 Thread Igor Gnatenko
On Dec 9, 2016 5:18 PM, "Matthew Miller" wrote: On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 11:07:32AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > > Anyways, in the big picture, while I don't speak for everyone on > > the Project Atomic side, I personally point users at CentOS first, > > unless I have

Re: a diversion into EPEL [was Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like]

2016-12-09 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On 9 December 2016 at 11:42, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > On Fri, 2016-12-09 at 11:17 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 11:07:32AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: >> > > Anyways, in the big picture, while I don't speak for everyone on >> > > the Project

Re: a diversion into EPEL [was Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like]

2016-12-09 Thread Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
On Fri, 2016-12-09 at 11:17 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 11:07:32AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > > > Anyways, in the big picture, while I don't speak for everyone on > > > the Project Atomic side, I personally point users at CentOS > > > first, > > > unless I have some

a diversion into EPEL [was Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like]

2016-12-09 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 11:07:32AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > > Anyways, in the big picture, while I don't speak for everyone on > > the Project Atomic side, I personally point users at CentOS first, > > unless I have some reason to think they want Fedora. Something like > > 80% of Fedora usage