@kgaillot I'm sorry I haven't reached out to you for the PR #1. Our main intention there was to 1) get a real patch 2) and give the whole contribution process a go 3) so we can test the tooling and the automation.

In the meantime, I have closed the corresponding BZ since it's no longer relevant based on your discussion. I hope it's fine with you to create a new one once you come to a conclusion here.

Would the proposed solution work? Or is there a better way to define rpm macros which are specific for CentOS and RHEL?

Hi,

No problem, I don't mind at all.

The patch here looks good. I'm planning on doing an 8.3 build in the next week or so, so I can include the change when I do that. I don't think we need a separate rhbz for it, spec changes are routine with a new build (unless you need a bz for your own bookkeeping).

Hi,
No problem, I don't mind at all.
The patch here looks good. I'm planning on doing an 8.3 build in the next week or so, so I can include the change when I do that. I don't think we need a separate rhbz for it, spec changes are routine with a new build (unless you need a bz for your own bookkeeping).

I feel like we don't need a dedicated BZ for it - that is really just for you, the RHEL maintainers, to ease the process of applying the contribution internally.

Thanks!

pacemaker-2.0.4-3 with the spec file change is on the 8.3 errata and in the buildroot

This change has been published and built for CentOS Stream.