[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: EPEL report 2007, week 19



On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 15:10 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Josh Boyer schrieb:
> > On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 13:22 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >> Find the report below!
> > Overall, looks great.  A few comments below.
> 
> thx
> 
> BTW, I put it into the wiki now, too.
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Reports
> 
> 
> >>  * the Steering Committee elected knurd as its chairmen; stahnma will
> >> act as backup
> > Could we use Real Names instead of IRC nicks?  I know who knurd is but I
> > don't know who stahnma is.
> 
> I tried that in the past and it makes stuff harder and time consuming to
> write in my experience (I have the nicks from the meeting log already
> and don't have to type them again or look out how peoples names are
> spelled correctly). So I prefer to use nicks as writing summaries and
> reports is boring enough already.
> 
> >>  * repotags -- some discussion in the meeting again. It looks like it
> >> will we'll continue without repotags (final decision probably in next
> >> weeks meeting, after this summary has been posted and discussed). If you
> >> want repotags please *speak up now* 

I do. But maybe you are just asking for "I do"'s from list participants
that do not have a third party repo? Rationale for support has been
already hashed to death in many threads. 

> >> and *help* to find a technical
> >> solution that is not only fine for the EPEL Steering Committee, but also
> >> acceptable for the Fedora Packaging Committee and FESCo -- from
> >> discussions on list and on IRC it looks like that some members of those
> >> groups tend to be against using repotags (see this weeks FESCo meeting
> >> for example) or want to see something cooperation statements signed by
> >> EPEL and 3rd party repos before they are willing to accept repotags.
> > Just some clarification.  Yes, FESCo overall didn't see a good reason to
> > use repotags.  If EPEL chooses to do so, FESCo won't stand in the way.
> 
> FYI: I was a bit against repotags in the past, but my position these
> days after all this discussions is similar.
> 
> Or, to be more verbose: If someone works out the details on how to
> realize repotags in Fedora then (depending on how the proposal looks
> like) I'll likely abstain from a vote or might even support to use
> repotags, as long as a simple "cp FC-6/foo.spec EL-5/" remains possible.
> 
> But I don't have the energy to work out the details. Anyone willing to
> work them out?

I presume this is internal help? (meaning how to tweak the build system
to support them transparently without any impact to the spec files
themselves?)

> > It would be unfortunate, however, if EPEL and FESCo packaging guidelines
> > diverged.
> 
> That what I want to prevent, too.

-- Fernando



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]