[Pulp-dev] Upcoming epel6 Dependency Issues
ipanova at redhat.com
Wed Nov 16 17:07:43 UTC 2016
I like this approach.
w/r to the blog post, would be good to explicitly point the users to give feedback on pulp-list (who knows, maybe not every user is aware of this list), since the comments are disabled.
Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
"Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Bouterse" <bbouters at redhat.com>
To: "Elyezer Rezende" <erezende at redhat.com>
Cc: pulp-dev at redhat.com
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:06:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Pulp-dev] Upcoming epel6 Dependency Issues
After some discussion today we determined the following will be done:
@mhrivnak is going to solicit feedback via pulp-list on how long (time or release) users want us to continue producing el6 builds for.
I will produce a blog post identifying what this epel6 change means for EL6 Pulp users
We decided to not enable comments on blog posts to keep the discussion in one place (pulp-list). Thank you @elyezer for the feedback.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Elyezer Rezende < erezende at redhat.com > wrote:
Do these kinds of next steps make any sense? What are some other approaches or next steps that would be good/better?
Trying to get user feedback makes completely sense to me. Having that feedback as early as possible will help us find how we can support Pulp users and identify the impact of dropping RHEL6 support.
About enabling comments on blog posts I remember we talking about that for other reason and maybe this is a good opportunity to have it.
Senior Quality Engineer
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev at redhat.com
More information about the Pulp-dev