On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Michael Stahnke mastahnke@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to at least keep logic for EPEL 6 (and higher eventually). Puppet 2.6 which is in EPEL currently goes dead upstream at the end of April, so we'll have to do something there. I'm still weighing options for EPEL in general.
(adding epel-devel-list to the CC)
If it's the case that Puppet 2.6 goes EOL in April, my vote would be to get Puppet 2.7 (or newer) into epel-testing sooner than later, so users have plenty of lead time to test this out.
- Ken
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Ken Dreyer ktdreyer@ktdreyer.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Michael Stahnke mastahnke@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to at least keep logic for EPEL 6 (and higher eventually). Puppet 2.6 which is in EPEL currently goes dead upstream at the end of April, so we'll have to do something there. I'm still weighing options for EPEL in general.
(adding epel-devel-list to the CC)
If it's the case that Puppet 2.6 goes EOL in April, my vote would be to get Puppet 2.7 (or newer) into epel-testing sooner than later, so users have plenty of lead time to test this out.
After the current security release of 2.6.18[1] is pushed to stable, I'll start working on the path forward for EPEL and leave it in testing for a bit.
[1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-0664/puppet-2.6.18-... [2] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-0657/puppet-2.6.18-...
- Ken
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Ken Dreyer -
Michael Stahnke