Bug 1956851

Summary:	centos-stream-release: rename to centos-release
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9	Reporter:	Carl George 🤠 <carl>
Component:	distribution	Assignee:	RHEL Program Management <pm-rhel>
Status:	CLOSED DEFERRED	QA Contact:	Release Test Team <release-test-team-automation>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	CentOS Stream	CC:	bstinson, jwboyer, ngompa13
Target Milestone:	beta
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-07-27 00:25:45 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Carl George 🤠 2021-05-04 14:29:37 UTC

Description of problem:
We used different release package names in 8 to distinguish between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream.  There will only be one 9 distribution, so we should revert back to the traditional centos-release name.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
centos-stream-release-9.0-1.0.4.el9


Additional info:
The dist-git repo is already named centos-release, so changing this would help avoid confusion.

Comment 1 Josh Boyer 2021-05-05 16:37:01 UTC

This seems unnecessary and from a branding perspective it seems like it would cause even more confusion by dropping the "stream" from the RPM name.  CentOS Linux 8 is going to be retired at the end of the year, but CentOS Linux 7 still exists.  Having "centos-linux" represent two fundamentally different distributions is likely not ideal.  Might be a "too soon" kind of timing that we can look at after CentOS Linux 7 retires.

Can you elaborate on who is currently confused?

Comment 2 Carl George 🤠 2021-05-05 22:42:42 UTC

It hasn't been a problem yet, but my concern is that if a contributor want to submit a change to this package they won't find a centos-stream-release repo in GitLab.

Waiting until after the retirement of CL7 would mean renaming the package in the middle of the CS9 lifecycle.  We're early enough in the process that renaming it now would not be disruptive.  In my opinion, it's now(-ish) or never for CS9.  Of course if we punt this for now I'd like to revisit for CS10.

Comment 3 Brian Stinson 2021-07-27 00:25:45 UTC

We should drop this for 9 and potentially revisit for 10.