On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 01:54:13PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 12:22 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Just judging by the way the infrastructure repo has grown over the course of
> RHEL5, I think that it's inevitable that we eventually roll our own version
> of tings that we are developing against. However, for the sake of reducing
> the maintainance burden we carry, I think it would be great if we could
> defer this for as long as possible.
> In TG2 vs TG2.1's case, most of the improvements seem to be speed. If we
> aren't having problems keeping up with the number of requests, perhaps we
> want to wait to switch to TG-2.1 on the app servers. Luke, does that sound
> right for now?
Speed, and a lot of bugfixes.
Since there's a lot of bugfixes, it seems likely that we'll just have to
suck it up and maintain our own copy in the infrastructure repo
Also, TG2.1, which is in EL-5 testing, is already on our app servers
of yesterday. If we need to pull 2.1 out of EL-5, we'll want to
Yeah -- EPEL is somewhat of a separate issue but we (EPEL) may not want to
have EPEL-5 at a higher evr than RHEL-6 when we can help it. I don't know
that there's actually a policy on this, though. I'll ask around on #epel.