On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 12:30:28PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
This means that we still have repos for fedora-18-* and epel-5-*.
Is this reasonable? Or are we just wasting storage? According to our logs those
repositories are still accessed (yes
even that fedora-18).
It could be it's some version independent noarch content that just
works fine even on latest OSes?
Personally, I think that keeping the repositories one year after EOL
date is just fine. That means we delete fedora-24-*
and older and epel-5-*. What do you think?
Can you use some "hasn't been accessed in the past 180 days" filter
for them, to see how much space could be freed without disrupting
people who for some reason still use the old content?
In any case, it'd be nice to notify the owners of those repos to give
them chance to review what they have and potentially rebuild their
content on newer buildroots, or just mark their repos "alive" and
extend the expiration for another 180 days. Or something to that
Do you have a use case for using ancient fedoras repos? What is
better for you: to have ancient fedora repos or to have
From time to time, I start containers as old as Fedora 24 to test some
behaviour -- namely it was the last Fedora where systemd reliably
produced status log in docker, but it's also useful to for checking
I don't use copr repos for that but i can imagine there are people who
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Security Engineering, Red Hat