On 02/22/2016 09:06 PM, Peter wrote:
On 19/02/16 15:16, ~Stack~ wrote:
> Thanks for replying. Makes sense. But what would the harm be to move a
> package into a separate "retired" repo? Community would know that it
> isn't maintained and yet the package wouldn't just disappear completely.
> I guess the difficult question would then be, how long is the package
> kept till it needs to be pruned? 1yr? 6mo? Still, it would be nice to
> give the user base the option to pull the packages they need out on a
> long enough scale that they have time to discover it with new builds.
My suggestion would be for the life of the point release of the repos
that's built against. Since the package is not going to be built
against newer point releases of RHEL it is less likely to continue to
work after RHEL moves to a new point release (say from 7.2 to 7.3). We
could have an individual "retired" repo for each point release that
would see the packages built against that release moved there. We would
not necessarily need get rid of older retired repos, but just maintain a
symbolic link to the latest one.
So for example if package foo was last built against RHEL 7.2 before it
was retired, we could move it to the repo "epel-retired-7.2" and there
would be a symbolic link for "epel-retired" that points to
epel-retired-7.2 until RHEL 7.3 is released.
In my opinion, that is a brilliant idea.
I like it! :-)
~Stack~