On Friday 07 November 2008 12:10:08 pm Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Ok loaded term but I was wondering if we could work with spacewalk, > ipa, ds, etc to support their work by including at least a > spacewalk-release or similar item. This would allow us to 'test' the > waters of working closer with the other layered upstreams. Basically > instead of having to hunt around for every different repository, we > work with the upstream project ot have a signed release that works > with the EPEL releases. > > Anyway.. back to dealing with local stuff.. I figured I should fire it > off before I forget. Other than completely violating fedora's guidelines that EPEL is subject to. I don't think its a good idea. It makes it too easy to not do the work needed to get things into fedora/EPEL fedora-ds is in fedora I suggest that you ask richm to build fedora-ds into EPEL. freeipa is in fedora also. we should talk with rcrit to get freeipa branched and built for EPEL it will require fedora-ds to be there first. we should get what we can of spacewalk in except for the bits needing oracle since they dont meet the guidelines yet. Spacewalk has said from the start that it will work to get in EPEL. as to other layered products we have always said that it will be up to the individual team if they wish to have their product in EPEL. I personally feel that having the product in EPEL will help not hinder sales. those people who wont pay for support will still not pay for support. those on the fence may deploy the product because of the easier route to installation and decide that once installed and in production they need support. Those customers who are willing to pay and want support will continue to do so. Dennis
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.