On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 2:16 PM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@redhat.com> wrote:
Dne 18. 11. 21 v 20:31 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
> - epel9-next stays the way it is currently setup.

Ehm, what is the current setup?


Sorry about that.  You are correct.  I didn't say how epel9-next is currently setup.
It is currently setup similar to epel8-next, except for a few key differences.

1 - epel8-next is built off the CentOS Stream 8 AppStream, BaseOS, and CRB repos.
epel9-next is currently being built off the CentOS Stream 9 buildroot

2 - epel8-next repo is supposed to be layered on top of epel8, and only have those packages that would install on CentOS Stream 8, but not on RHEL8.  This is normally very few packages.
-- Since there is no epel9 at this time, all packages have to be in epel9-next
 

And mainly, when I build something in EPEL next, something not compatible with EPEL. How it gets to EPEL when next RHEL
9.x gets released? I see nothing relevant at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-updates/

The

   https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-about-next/

state that maintainer should do rebuild manually after the release of RHEL. That sound error-prone and leaves wide time
gap when there may be broken deps.

That is what this rollout proposal is about, figuring out the best way to do this rollout.

Do we keep everything in epel9-next until RHEL9 GA and then do a mass branch over and mass rebuild? (Plan A)
As you said, this can be error prone and could leave a wide time gap.

Do we start epel9 now, and have it be like epel8 and epel8-next right now? (Plan B and C)
If so, where do we get the RHEL9 packages?
From RHEL 9 Beta ? (Plan B)
From CentOS Stream 9 ? (Plan C)

Is there a Plan D that hasn't been brought up yet?

Troy