El jue, 18-01-2018 a las 14:33 -0500, Matthew Miller escribió:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 02:09:26PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Given that Python 2 is going EOL in about two years, I don't
> > think we
> > want it in EPEL proper. If we do provide it, it should be in a
> > module.
> You're referring to EPEL > 7, right?
For Python, yes.
> Also, that last part is kind of
> a leap in assumption. Perhaps it's because I'm not up to speed on
> EPEL plans, but do we have timelines for when/if modules will be
> created for and available for EPEL?
It's the plan of record that by default, all modules will be
across all available buildroots. I'm not sure if that means EPEL7
be an available option for technical reasons, but I hope so. This
possibly require a modular-capable DNF in EPEL proper or in a side-
of some sort -- TBD. But if that works, we'll start having modular
content for EL right along with the F28 release.
If this is something we want to do in that timeline things need to be
getting put in place now. We should have a discssion about what we
would like, what timelines we would do it on, and how it would all look
and work. The DNF and RPM teams probably need to chime in to let us
know what is practical. in order to have it in the F28 timeline we need
to get it enabled in the next 6-8 weeks.
If not, it'll have to wait for the "higher than 7" RHEL
should be able to enable module building for that pretty quickly once
the target OS is available.
What EPEL greater than 7 looks like will be a discussion to be had when
there is something to build against relased publicly, until we see
what the base looks like we can not determine what EPEL will look like.
I know that many of us Fedora packagers stay away from EPEL, but at
least for me, that's largely because I'm not confident about
to the long lifecycle, because to keep packages stable I'd have to
diverge from Fedora, and because rpm abilities lag so much.
This is a big issue, it is a commitment, people have thier own ideas on
what stable and supported in EPEL means.
With modules, the first two concerns are handled (because I can
maintain my modules with whatever commitments I feel comfortable
even with an EL target). And at least initially the RPM/DNF
should be on par with modern Fedora.