Comment from @kevin via e-mail:

The only thing off hand is that we might want to s/el8/epel8/ ?
The reason we did that for rpms was to avoid confusion... ie, someone
thinking 'oh, this is rhel8'. I'm not sure how much it matters in this
case, but it's nice to be consistent.

@kevin, I had the same el8 vs. epel8 question, so I just picked one and expected it would get hashed out during the review process--so thanks for bringing it up!

Can anyone (perhaps @psabata, @mprahl, or @jkaluza?) say with authority whether it needs to be platform:el8 or platform:epel8?

@merlinm unfortunately, I don't have any authority over this decision.

I had a brief discussion with @psabata, and there is some very sound reasoning why this should be platform:el8 rather than platform:epel8. Hopefully he can provide a brief summary of that reasoning here.

We discussed this with @sgallagh and @smooge last week and I think el8 is the way to go to make module stream expansion as painless as possible.

RHEL 8 identifies itself as platform:el8 at runtime. If the build-time dependency is named differently, packagers would need to put in extra effort to make it work instead of it happening automagically. That's not our goal.

This has been posted to the infrastructure list as a patch. Any further discussion should continue in the list...

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/USYORIZEP232LCB7KXUD4L2WHAWWWDHE/