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

Re: is it possible to add ant-1.7.x to epel?



Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 10.11.2008 21:57, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:48:13PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> For ant I'm not that sure if packaging a newer version is wise or
>>> not,  as I'm not familiar enough with it. But I tend to say "that way
>>> lie  dragons", as it's hard to draw the line where to stop with it
>>> --  otherwise we soon get request to include openoffice3 or kde4 in
>>> EPEL...
>>
>> I don't view it as an issue, as long as * the upgrade path is right,
>> that is the EPEL package is updated by the   corresponding  RHEL/EPEL
>> package in the next RHEL/EPEL release,   which implies some
>> coordination with RHEL/EPEL maintainers.
> 
> Well, such coordination in the EPEL past afaics often didn't work that
> well (just like it didn't in the Extras days when Extras maintainers had
> to deal with maintainers from Fedora Core).
> 
>> * the packages are stable enough for inclusing in EPEL, which is not
>> the   case for the 2 you mentionned, in my opinion, but is certainly
>> so for   ant17.
> 
> Well, the 2 I mentioned were (obviously) extreme examples. But as I
> said: where draw the line/where stop? People likely have good reasons
> for hundred other packages that are basically new versions of software
> that is already included in RHEL. I fear that the whole things could get
> quite messy over time.

the newer version (and-1.7) here means a 2 years old version...

-- 
  Levente                               "Si vis pacem para bellum!"


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