What happen to working with CentOS ? I thought there was duplicated efforts between SL & CentOS. Are there advantages to: - co-ordinated release of TUV patches, security updates, etc. - co-ordinate distro releases - common fastbugs, testing, devel & contrib areas - common bugzilla platform How much redundancy is there between CentOS-extras & SL ? What are the major differences between CentOS & SL ? Regards, Chris Hunter Yale University > Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:15:04 -0500 > From: Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: SL6 Planning Questions > > Hello, > With the RHEL6 beta out, and SL 5.5 released, it's time to really start > planning for SL6. > There are a few idea's that would be good to be discussed before we > charge forward to implement them. > > *Sites - Customized SL releases > In the past, we have always put patches into anaconda (the installer) so > that people and groups can more easily create a custom release. > We were thinking of not changing the installer at all, but instead > implement revisor, and it's friends, to create custom sites, in the same > way that Fedora creates their custom spins. > - This would be less work on our part > - Documentation should be better since we would mainly be using Fedora's > - The technique could be transfered to CentOS based distributions. > > *Yum - autoupdate > How do we want to do that? > - Continue with my script ? > - Use yum-cron ? > - have several things available ? > > *Kernel-modules > They are a necessary evil. How should we handle them on SL6 > > *Security - Bugs - Enhancement Updates > Do we want everything separate still? > Do we want everything in one big yum repository with them labeled > correctly as Security, Bugs, and Enhancements? > If we had them in one big repository, we would have to label them as > security, bugs, enhansements, and them make sure we used the > yum-security plugin. > > *Yum Repositories > What should we have for default? > Should we still have "contrib"? > Should we add "development"? > Should we have yum-conf-epel? Or should that be a default repository? > > *JAVA > I propose we don't add Sun's (Oracle's) java. > > *What should we add to SL6 > At the last Hepix meeting one of the discussions was that many > scientists are adding their packages to EPEL. They would like it if > packages that are in EPEL stay just in EPEL and not go into SL unless > there is a good reason for it. > A good reason would be that it is needed during the install. > I like this idea and would like to adopt it. > This would mean that we would take out several packages that have > traditionally been in earlier SL releases, but I think it will make > things better and more consistent in the long run. > This way scientists would be able to know they are getting the same > packages whether they are running SL, RHEL or CentOS. > Thoughts on this proposal? > > Troy > -- __________________________________________________ Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/LSCS/CSI/USS Group __________________________________________________