similar to: Version numbering vis a vis CentOS and RHEL

On Mon, 7 Dec 2015, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > - Coordination of other repositories (e.g. EPEL) is based on the "version", > how does that work now? Exactly the same as it did before. Before you'd have a $maj.$min repo, which is the same as it is now. maj=7 min=1.1503 You can park it there and not suffer any problems as I understand it. At least that's what I've

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: > On 07/12/15 15:52, John Hodrien wrote: > > > To me, I'm not sure I get any issues or advantages from the new scheme, > > but I > > can't say it bothers me greatly. > > This is the thing that bothers me most - that folks dont have a good > grasp on what / why the

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: > On 07/12/15 16:17, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > > > IRC is not a good choice for communicating with IT admins in a large > > enterprise environment. It is usually blocked. > > > > Does google hangout work ? we might be able to also setup a phone dial > in setup > > --

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:42 AM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth at gmail.com> wrote: > On 7 Dec 2015 23:43, "J Martin Rushton" <martinrushton56 at btinternet.com> > wrote: > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 07/12/15 22:37, Warren Young wrote: > > > On Dec 7, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Greg Lindahl <lindahl

On 07/12/15 15:52, John Hodrien wrote: > To me, I'm not sure I get any issues or advantages from the new scheme, > but I > can't say it bothers me greatly. This is the thing that bothers me most - that folks dont have a good grasp on what / why the numbering is working like this. We are still a small team, and all efforts are flat out on getting the iso media and images done,

On 12/07/2015 05:46 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> > wrote: > >> On 07/12/15 16:17, Phelps, Matthew wrote: >>> >>> IRC is not a good choice for communicating with IT admins in a large >>> enterprise environment. It is usually blocked. >>> >> >> Does google

On 07/12/15 16:17, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > IRC is not a good choice for communicating with IT admins in a large > enterprise environment. It is usually blocked. > Does google hangout work ? we might be able to also setup a phone dial in setup -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Gianluca Cecchi <gianluca.cecchi at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! > > > > > > And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based on RHEL-7.3 > > >

On 7 Dec 2015 23:43, "J Martin Rushton" <martinrushton56 at btinternet.com> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 07/12/15 22:37, Warren Young wrote: > > On Dec 7, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:57:01PM +0100, Zdenek Sedlak wrote: > >>

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > On 11/04/2016 04:38 AM, James Hogarth wrote: > > As a heads up RHEL 7.3 is released: > > <snip> > > 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! > > And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based on RHEL-7.3 > Sources. The main tree will be labeled '7.3.1611' on

This is not your usual "so when is CO 7.8.xxxx coming out?" posts. I'm just curious if the CentOS team is affected by our current world conditions, or is work-from-home modus operandi for the team? (In other words, "when is CO 7.8.xxxx coming out?") -- *Matt Phelps* *Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator* (Computation Facility, Smithsonian

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > On Wed, March 22, 2017 7:46 am, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > Red Hat released RHEL 6.9 yesterday. > > > > Why isn't CentOS 6.9 out yet? :) > > > Somebody has to do a hard work, I'm sure. Thanks, guys for the great work > you are doing! > > Or you as

On Wed, March 22, 2017 7:46 am, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > Red Hat released RHEL 6.9 yesterday. > > Why isn't CentOS 6.9 out yet? :) > Somebody has to do a hard work, I'm sure. Thanks, guys for the great work you are doing! Or you as sysadmin know that and just being ironic? Valeri > > > -- > Matt Phelps > System Administrator, Computation Facility > Harvard

Red Hat released RHEL 6.9 yesterday. Why isn't CentOS 6.9 out yet? :) -- Matt Phelps System Administrator, Computation Facility Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu, http://www.cfa.harvard.edu

On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:57:01PM +0100, Zdenek Sedlak wrote: > AFAIK, the 7(1503) format is used only on the websites, and internally > CentOS uses 7.1.1503. Do you see this as an issue? Yes. It confuses humans. There have been a bunch of examples given of how it confuses humans. A simple fix for this human issue is to use 7.1.1503 on the website, here on the mailing list, etc. -- greg

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/12/15 22:37, Warren Young wrote: > On Dec 7, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:57:01PM +0100, Zdenek Sedlak wrote: >> >>> AFAIK, the 7(1503) format is used only on the websites, and >>> internally CentOS uses 7.1.1503. Do you see this as an

On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 12:08 PM Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu> wrote: > > I *know* there has been a lot going on, and congratulations on getting > CentOS 8 out! > > But(!), I don't see any updates to CO 7.7.1908 in the "updates" directory > on the mirrors I typically use. All the files date from Sept. 14th. > > Is something broken? >

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 9:24 AM Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 08:18, Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu> > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 6:33 AM Jim Perrin <jperrin at centos.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/3/19 9:35 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > >

On Dec 7, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:57:01PM +0100, Zdenek Sedlak wrote: > >> AFAIK, the 7(1503) format is used only on the websites, and internally >> CentOS uses 7.1.1503. Do you see this as an issue? > > Yes. It confuses humans. There have been a bunch of examples given of > how it confuses

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu> wrote: > > > > > 1. Is CentOS-7.3 done yet? Answer: NO! > > > > And it is NOT CentOS-7.3 .. it is CentOS-7 (1611) based on RHEL-7.3 > > Sources. The main tree will be labeled '7.3.1611' on the mirrors (along > > side 7.0.1406 and 7.1.1503, and 7.2.1511, all of