On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Michael Stahnke
<mastahnke(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to at least keep logic for EPEL 6 (and higher eventually).
> Puppet 2.6 which is in EPEL currently goes dead upstream at the end of
> April, so we'll have to do something there. I'm still weighing
> options for EPEL in general.
(adding epel-devel-list to the CC)
If it's the case that Puppet 2.6 goes EOL in April, my vote would be
to get Puppet 2.7 (or newer) into epel-testing sooner than later, so
users have plenty of lead time to test this out.
After the current security release of 2.6.18[1] is pushed to stable,
I'll start working on the path forward for EPEL and leave it in
testing for a bit.
[1]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-0664/puppet-2.6....
[2]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-0657/puppet-2.6....
- Ken
_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list