Keep or remove GlusterFS from EPEL-6?

Niels de Vos devos at fedoraproject.org
Wed May 16 13:09:10 UTC 2012


On 05/16/2012 02:42 PM, Steve Traylen wrote:
>
> On May 16, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> in #gluster on Freenode, we discussed a little if GlusterFS is allowed in EPEL-6. EPEL-5 is not affected as Red Hat does not provide packages for GlusterFS on RHEL-5.
>>
>> The policy that may forbid GlusterFS in EPEL-6:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Policy mentions "packages from EPEL should never replace packages from the target base distribution - including those on the base distribution as well as layered products".
>>
>> The Red Hat Storage product that includes GlusterFS is like an appliance. Customers who buy a subscription get access to a DVD download of RHEL-6.2.z (Extended Update Support, EUS) with the packages from an additional RHN-ChildChannel. It is not possible/intended/supported to use this RHN-ChildChannel without installing your system from the "Red Hat Storage" DVD. Therefore this RHN-ChildChannel is a little different from other layered products.
>>
>> The first time a Red Hat product that includes GlusterFS was released in November 2011. EPEL-6 already contained the GlusterFS packages. The EPEL-policy was not harmed, but now GlusterFS is made available by Red Hat, and it is possible to have two sources for GlusterFS (one being EPEL-6, the other through the Red Hat Storage ChildChannel).
>>
>> The question I have now:
>> Is it needed to block the glusterfs package from EPEL-6? Even if most RHEL users will not have access to EUS channel(s) that contain the glusterfs packages?
>>
>
> My understanding is that glusterfs does not (and preferably for me at least) should not be removed:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#How_can_I_know_which_packages_are_part_of_RHEL.3F
>
> states what packages should be considered as a conflict, .. I thought some where was page that
> exactly dealt with the extra RHEL streams however the Guidelines link you posted suggest I may be wrong though
> given the binary derivatives don't genrally distribute these  extra streams its a bit of a tall order.
>
> See:
>

Not sure if it helps, but the packages are here:
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/RHS/2.0/SRPMS/

They are not under the "os" directory where most packages live:
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/

It may not be a problem for binary derivatives of RHEL if they don't 
provide glusterfs packages. But this may be a problem for people who use 
the Red Hat Storage bits.

Cheers,
Niels




More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list