RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

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.

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?

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.

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