On 06/12/2015 01:31 PM, Dirk Müller wrote: >> If instead it seems >> the differences are minor enough that combining efforts is a win for >> everyone, then that's even better, but I don't see it as the required >> outcome here personally. > > Right. We've started with an open discussion and not started with any > of those two outcomes in mind already. I think thats also why we > agreed to start with a "green field" and not seed the repos with any > of the distro's existing spec files. > > To me it looks promising that we can mechanically compile the $distro > policy conformant .spec file from the canonical upstream naming, and > at some point that compile step might end up being a "cp".
Yikes ... having to start green field and drop history from the last several years seems quite unfortunate. It kind of sounds like "too much work to be worth it" to me, but I'm just on the sidelines here. Anyway, my main objective was just to make sure nobody felt like combining efforts was the only acceptable outcome. I'm happy with whatever you all end up deciding is most helpful overall. -- Russell Bryant __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
