Retiring OpenShift v2 non-client packages from Fedora
mmaslano at redhat.com
Mon Oct 6 10:46:16 UTC 2014
On 10/03/2014 10:51 PM, Haïkel wrote:
> 2014-10-03 22:30 GMT+02:00 Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh at redhat.com>:
>> On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 21:43 +0200, Haïkel wrote:
>>> This makes sense to me, though it annoys me as a token of our failure
>>> to be an attractive platform for such use cases.
>>> DId you consider providing a copr repository ?
>> A COPR repository probably wouldn't work, because they'd have to provide
>> a conflicting version of the ruby platform. I doubt that would fly. They
>> *could* stick a private copy of ruby in a non-standard location and use
>> it, but that's an awful lot of work for uncertain gain.
>> * I'm not an OpenShift dev
> In this case, I was thinking about using an SCL. Just asking, not
> forcing a burden upon anyone.m
> I guess, this is where the work from Env&Stack WG will be critical to
> ensure that Fedora remains a viable platform for services developers
> (not only OpenShift).
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Well, yes, we were trying... I'm currently running rebuilds of RHSCL
also for Fedora, but there are some differences in buildroots, so it
will take some time. Also I don't think it will be easy to attract those
who already left for CentOS back to Fedora.
More information about the devel