<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:D23F204B-66E9-46F5-95DE-ACD4FC82637E@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 8:51 AM,
Craig Tracey <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:craig@craigtracey.com" target="_blank">craig@craigtracey.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Great input Kris. We also took a look
at Anvil, and as you mention it is heavily biased
for RH based distros.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>With regard to your requirements:</div>
<div>1) Under the cover for Giftwrap we use fpm for
package creation, so debs and rpms are merely a
flag to toggle.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>During the Paris session someone specifically
mentioned they didn't want to use fpm, and wanted
plain spec files instead. If that person is on this
list, or if there's anyone else in that position, care
to elaborate? Is there a specific limitation people
are concerned about?</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We get this request pretty commonly - the most common use
case I hear like this is people who want to start with a
"reference" build (RDO / OSP, UCA, etc) and minimally customize.
So they want to stay with the original spec or debian/*
packaging and tweak, vs package de novo</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
Yes. We do this, and it's much better, than thinking about 'how to
split one neutron to bunch of different packages'. Repackaging is
mostly or bugfixes (hello from havana - we still backporing fixes
from juno/icehouse), or minor changes for own needs (like 'strict
host isolation' filter) - and 'do it from scratch' is too heavy.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>