On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 12:36:07PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > >What you are implying, is that your voting was effectively shooting > >down cooperation and coexistance with other 3rd parties. I'm sure > >other people that voted like you have a different interpretation of > >their vote, at least I hope so. > > > >But at the very least this requires the clarification I asked for. Did > >the other 4 people that voted against it also vote against working > >with other repos? If so, then you are right, and it takes me a while > >to understand it and get over it. > > > Fact: we voted against having it. > Fact: you guys continue to use it (did you vote on it?) Fact: The repotag only makes sense cross-repo, and repos using it was because they wanted to 1) keep the package easily identified 2) not place themselves higher in any hierarchy > Guess: If we asked you guys to get rid of the Repo tag in corporation > with us, you'd probably say no. Fact: The moment one repo starts dropping it, it doesn't matter anymore, the system has gone bananas. > Fact: We haven't asked you to remove the repo tag, we respect the > decision making process that you used to use a repo tag but we came to a > different conclusion for EPEL. > > Fact: the sky isn't falling. OK, so back to the real questions I asked about general cooperation and coexitance. Although I said I didn't want to talk about the repotag you get back to it. > If you have another problem, bring it to us and don't assume we'll be > against you. Obviously I can't speak for everyone but I take every > decision seriously and based on its merit. You're assuming this is just > the start of EPEL completely ignoring 3rd party repos and it's just > not. Indeed, that is the suspicion that lies behind it. Several 3rd party repo maintainers vouched for EPEL to carry a repotag and it was a pure political thing to do. You can't hide behind technicalities when such a call is being made. Not to mention that a repotag would even have technical benefits, which was not what it was about at all. > I will say the tone of the email that started this thread is not one > of corporation, it's one of flame baiting and instigation, knock it > off. Just check the tone of your very own mail, you're chopping off all quoting, but a "Hi," and tell people to "get over it", "knock it off", you "take offense" and call other people's post as "flame baiting and instigation". -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpkLC9bdd8iO.pgp
Description: PGP signature