On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 10:11:26AM -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:17 AM, Axel Thimm wrote: > > the voting/decision on repotags was labeled as being 99% a political > > one, and no one objected against that old statement. Does the outcome > > of EPEL not carrying repotags mean that there is no interest in > > cooperation with 3rd party repos? > > > > I'm not after answers on pseudo-technical details, so consider the > > above question as rhetorical, instead let me rephrase completely > > outside the scope of repotags: > > > > What is EPEL's intended relation to the existing third party repos? > Hi Axel, I'm a bit confused about which statement you are referring > to in your first sentence, could you please clarify for me? That voting about repotags is a 99% political decision of playing nice with other 3rd party repos. The remaining 1% was shared between confusion between RHEL and EPEL packages and technical implementation. > I'm glad that you brought up this subject directly as I feel it does > need to be addressed. In your questions, are you referring to all > possible "3rd party" repos, or only to a few of the biggest ones - if > so, which are considered big enough to be considered? I'm a fair player, I'm not casting away small or new repos. This sounds like you're running one yourself, which one is it? > In my opinion it is difficult at best to enable multiple repos on a > single machine. Which is due to lack of coordination of these repos. > Axel, I would also be interested to know what your thoughts are on > the questions you posed to the list. How would you like to see EPEL > and other repos interact (if at all)? Well, I'm one of the few that voted in favour of EPEL playing nice with other repos, so I'm interested in a healthy two-way interaction. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpEbtADGuzEw.pgp
Description: PGP signature