Greetings.
This was discussed a bit in the #epel channel, but it was suggested I take it to the list...
While adding the epel-modular.repo file to the epel8 branch of the epel-release package, I noticed that the package was installing /etc/yum.repos.d/epel-playground.repo (although with enabled=0)--which seemed a little out of place.
The question came up whether the epel8 version of the epel-release package should be installing that repo file at all, or whether it should be completely dropped and only be installed by the epel8-playground version of the epel-release package.
Are there any opinions about dropping the epel-playground.repo file from the epel8 branch of the epel-release package? Or leave it as is?
I can see one potential use case where someone could run dnf --enablerepo=epel-playground update epel-release as a way to switch from the standard to playground repos.
Merlin
That's how I enable epel8-playground, as does anyone who currently used KDE on RHEL8. (I honestly don't know how many are using kde from epel8, so I have no idea how large that number is)
Do we have documentation on how to use epel8-playground if you remove this file?
Troy
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:09 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings.
This was discussed a bit in the #epel channel, but it was suggested I take it to the list...
While adding the epel-modular.repo file to the epel8 branch of the epel-release package, I noticed that the package was installing /etc/yum.repos.d/epel-playground.repo (although with enabled=0)--which seemed a little out of place.
The question came up whether the epel8 version of the epel-release package should be installing that repo file at all, or whether it should be completely dropped and only be installed by the epel8-playground version of the epel-release package.
Are there any opinions about dropping the epel-playground.repo file from the epel8 branch of the epel-release package? Or leave it as is?
I can see one potential use case where someone could run dnf --enablerepo=epel-playground update epel-release as a way to switch from the standard to playground repos.
Merlin
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 3:40 PM Troy Dawson tdawson@redhat.com wrote:
That's how I enable epel8-playground, as does anyone who currently used KDE on RHEL8. (I honestly don't know how many are using kde from epel8, so I have no idea how large that number is)
Do we have documentation on how to use epel8-playground if you remove this file?
There doesn't seem to be much documentation about enabling/using the epel8-playground repo at all. However, my web searches turned up a few references about using the dnf --enablerepo=epel-playground install ... method to grab experimental packages.
Troy
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:09 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings.
This was discussed a bit in the #epel channel, but it was suggested I
take it to the list...
While adding the epel-modular.repo file to the epel8 branch of the
epel-release package, I noticed that the package was installing /etc/yum.repos.d/epel-playground.repo (although with enabled=0)--which seemed a little out of place.
The question came up whether the epel8 version of the epel-release
package should be installing that repo file at all, or whether it should be completely dropped and only be installed by the epel8-playground version of the epel-release package.
Are there any opinions about dropping the epel-playground.repo file from
the epel8 branch of the epel-release package? Or leave it as is?
I can see one potential use case where someone could run dnf
--enablerepo=epel-playground update epel-release as a way to switch from the standard to playground repos.
Merlin
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to
infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro... _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 2:13 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 3:40 PM Troy Dawson tdawson@redhat.com wrote:
That's how I enable epel8-playground, as does anyone who currently used KDE on RHEL8. (I honestly don't know how many are using kde from epel8, so I have no idea how large that number is)
Do we have documentation on how to use epel8-playground if you remove this file?
There doesn't seem to be much documentation about enabling/using the epel8-playground repo at all. However, my web searches turned up a few references about using the dnf --enablerepo=epel-playground install ... method to grab experimental packages.
Sounds like we need to leave it where it is.
Troy
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:09 PM Merlin Mathesius mmathesi@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings.
This was discussed a bit in the #epel channel, but it was suggested I take it to the list...
While adding the epel-modular.repo file to the epel8 branch of the epel-release package, I noticed that the package was installing /etc/yum.repos.d/epel-playground.repo (although with enabled=0)--which seemed a little out of place.
The question came up whether the epel8 version of the epel-release package should be installing that repo file at all, or whether it should be completely dropped and only be installed by the epel8-playground version of the epel-release package.
Are there any opinions about dropping the epel-playground.repo file from the epel8 branch of the epel-release package? Or leave it as is?
I can see one potential use case where someone could run dnf --enablerepo=epel-playground update epel-release as a way to switch from the standard to playground repos.
Merlin
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org