Agree, we can move that into a later discussion. Taking back into the topic I think that the proposal needs a section describing why this is needed or what is the problem that we are trying to solve with these changes. -Erich On 7/17/18, 11:16 AM, "Scott Little" <scott.little@windriver.com> wrote: Important subjects that I want to participate in, but I think that's a subject for a different thread. Long term solutions, versus a short term need to get WindRiver converged onto StarlingX. For now, we'd like to get a rational directory structure. Subdivision of current gits into per-package gits can happen later if that's the path we choose. Scott On 18-07-17 11:54 AM, Cordoba Malibran, Erich wrote: > Hi Scott, > > Thanks for the info. There's something I would like to bring into the discussion of the consolidation. > It has started a discussion on what infrastructure we need to have a CI of StarlingX and an evaluation on > OBS (openbuildservice) and Koji has started. > > Taking that in mind I'm wondering how this consolidation can help/affect to adapt the StarlingX building > Into one of these infrastructures, as far as I recall, both solutions requires to have a repository per rpm. > > What are your thoughts on this? > > Thanks > > -Erich