On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 02:18:48AM +0200, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote:
On 09.07.21 17:41, Carl George wrote:
> I disagree with the suggestion that participation is required to use
> CentOS Stream. It's certainly recommended, but I have had multiple
> people tell me personally that they switched from CL8 to CS8 and
> forgot they did it and didn't notice a difference. They didn't file
> bugs, they didn't participate in IRC or the mailing list, they just
> used it and it was fine. CS8 hasn't been a constant thorn for them.
> I'm not claiming it's been perfect, there have certainly been
> regressions, but they are fixed faster than they ever were in CL8 (or
> previous major versions) and I strongly feel that most users will be
> best served by getting switched to CS8 at or just after the CL8 EOL.
Hands on - I tried to switch some workstations to CS8 like it would be
done at the end of the year. The next monday would bring me angry users
into my "virtual" office because there applications does not run
anymore. What happens?
Applications from 3rd party repos like RPM Fusion that link against
"qt5-qtbase(x86-64) = 5.12.5" do not have any providers anymore
(CS8 got an upgrade to 5.15.2. So, like EPEL it seems that
everything else needs also a -next branch (just kidding).
What would be new in 8.6? That will be state of CS8 at the end
of the year?
This seems to be worth discussing with RPM Fusion developers.
With CentOS 8 going EOL at the end of the year, it's likely that a
substantial portion of the userbase will end up on CentOS Stream.
What would it take to have a `-next` overlay repo for packages that need
to be rebuilt for Stream for rpmfusion free and nonfree?
Michel Alexandre Salim