Open LalatenduMohanty opened 7 years ago
@LalatenduMohanty Do we already took any step for CentOS PaaS SIG side (at least a request to have minishift tag)? I am in favor of PaaS sig instead COPR because COPR is not something which contain official packages.
@praveenkumar The first step we are doing in PaaS SIG is to package Minishift RPM then the ISO will follow. I will request for a tag asap.
@praveenkumar @LalatenduMohanty - Is this anything we can do right away? Otherwise I suggest we move this into 1.1.0 and release 1.0.0.
@hferentschik I would suggest to move it for 1.1.0 release because right now we don't have much time to do needful.
I would suggest to move it for 1.1.0 release because right now we don't have much time to do needful.
+1 That was my thinking as well.
Let's do that, and then cut 1.0.0 of this repo. I think there are no actual changes since the last rc release, so it is more of a formality.
Let's do that, and then cut 1.0.0 of this repo.
+1
@praveenkumar @LalatenduMohanty what is the state here. Is there another repo we could get it from? Or should we keep deferring it?
fuse-sshfs
is in EPEL.
Yes, we can try using the EPEL repository.
We should not use
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/atomic/x86_64/adb/
as it is not not maintained, the workaround will be to use a COPR repo or the new Minishift repo in CentOS PaaS SIG (when it is ready). [1] https://github.com/minishift/minishift-centos-iso/pull/108/files [2] https://copr.fedoraproject.org/