On 08/04/2017 12:37 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi
KF> I don't think we have any way to find out the version of a package
KF> in all channels. At least I don't know of such a way. So, I think we
KF> should concern ourselves with only the channels that EPEL says it
KF> will try and not conflict with.
I don't even know what those are, really. All I know is what I can
extract from those json files, and what CentOS has. Certainly limiting
things to what EPEL can see is the only reasonable way; I was just
trying to hedge against the fact that I can't see what's in
The json files we provide are the exact channels that epel uses and
tries not to collide with. RHEL has hundreds (thousands?) of other
channels we don't look at.
KF> So, yeah, we would need to make sure and retire the epel
KF> soon as rhel started providing a source package with the same name.
I think it is somewhat unlikely that RHEL would begin providing any
python2-X source packages where they currently provide python-X source
packages. I guess it's possible, though, and it's something we'd have
to deal with immediately if it ever happens. However, it shouldn't
cause issues for end-user systems in that case, only the EPEL builders,
and for those the fix is very quick (block in koji and wait for a newrepo).
KF> I'm in favor... lets give it a try with some of the common
Thanks; I have a list of four I'm starting with, listed at the end of
I hope that once in this will make life easier for someone.
Indeed. Thanks for working on this.