but the build process should be the same, no? I can't believe RH would use a completely different build process for the release than for the beta/development stuff. On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:36 PM Peter <peter at pajamian.dhs.org> wrote:> On 21/06/20 9:15 am, John Pierce wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 4:08 AM Tom Bishop <bishoptf at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> +1 Streams is not for a production workload, if I wanted that I can > easily > >> deploy an Arch instance if I want or need a rolling distro (it's not > Redhat > >> etc but still). If Redhat wanted CentOS to be released near the same > time > >> line they could help make that happen, although that wouldn't be in > there > >> best financial interest. > > > > > > think of it this way ... when the rolling beta is done, the final release > > will be done with no further delay. > > No, Stream and the core OS are built form a completely separate set of > sources. I highly doubt that we could use binaries built from stream to > populate the final release. The whole thing has to be rebuilt for the > final release regardless of the status of Stream. > > > Peter > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >-- -john r pierce recycling used bits in santa cruz
On 21/06/20 1:23 pm, John Pierce wrote:> but the build process should be the same, no? I can't believe RH would > use a completely different build process for the release than for the > beta/development stuff.The packages still have to be built as a whole, they need to go through QA testing, isos need to be built and tested. The only thing that I can think of that Stream benefits this process is to help Red Hat find the odd bug here and there before their final release (after which CentOS still has to do everything listed above). Peter
Il 21/06/20 03:28, Peter ha scritto:> On 21/06/20 1:23 pm, John Pierce wrote: >> but the build process should be the same, no???? I can't believe RH >> would >> use a completely different build process for the release than for the >> beta/development stuff. > > The packages still have to be built as a whole, they need to go > through QA testing, isos need to be built and tested.? The only thing > that I can think of that Stream benefits this process is to help Red > Hat find the odd bug here and there before their final release (after > which CentOS still has to do everything listed above). > > > Peter > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centosI have a question. Why CentOS Stream is needed and what problem it solves?
> On 21/06/20 1:23 pm, John Pierce wrote: >> but the build process should be the same, no? I can't believe RH >> would >> use a completely different build process for the release than for the >> beta/development stuff. > > The packages still have to be built as a whole, they need to go through > QA testing, isos need to be built and tested. The only thing that I can > think of that Stream benefits this process is to help Red Hat find the > odd bug here and there before their final release (after which CentOS > still has to do everything listed above).As I understand it the whole full build and QA and whatever may still be done again. The big difference is that the whole work of how to build and setting up the build infrastructure has already been done and is known and tested. So the complete build is going quite fast and the big delays are a thing of the past. If it's going to be like that it sounds very good. Regards, Simon