Voting: repotag for EPEL

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 05.04.2007 12:02, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 11:55:31AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> I other words: FPC is no dumping ground for realizing something EPEL wants.
> No, we will certainly resist that.

I would, too. ;-)

> That was not what I was implying, you probably know that. 

Then I'd say your example was quite bad.

> The point is - once again - that the political
> decision is not FPC's to make, but EPELs, don't push that away. The
> engineering/implementation parts are FPC's to make.

It's a hand in hand process by both afaics.

>> Axel, the best thing at this point of time afaics is not a binding vote
>> with the question "Should EPEL carry a repotag". A more simple
>> questioning "Should we investigate further if we want to use a repotag
>> and how it could be realize it if we want to" would be much better.
> Aka postpone, work w/o a repotag and later noone wants to touch it
> again. Aka effectivly vote against it, but pretend we care. Why didn't
> you "investigate" when it was discussed? Everyone else including the
> FPC did.
> 
> We need to finalize it and face it with a proper decision, no more
> pushing away to FPC, future or any other place/time.

We just need someone to work out how the technical solution roughly
could look like before I'm willig to vote. Someone that wants repotag
should do that to get some "+1 for repotags" on his side afaics. You
seem to be interested in repotags and you are in both committees; you
look like the ideal candidate to do that to me. Propose a rough concept
how it could look like and you'll get a "abstrains" or maybe even a "+1"
from me. Currently it's a 'don't want to vote at all; but if I'm forced
to vote now it's definitely a "no repotags"'. Is the latter what you want?

CU
thl