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

Re: pexepct is in RHEL and should be dropped from EPEL



2009/1/23 Robert Scheck <robert fedoraproject org>:
> Hello Jeroen,
>
> On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
>> I would definitely say that since they're in the business of making
>> customers happy, not us, part of that responsibility is bumping release
>> numbers, searching for higher nevra and communication with the EPEL
>> maintainers, so that their customers remain happy (rather then confused
>> between RHEL and EPEL packages).
>
> thank you. You're somehow the first guy on this thread being knowledged in
> basic things of packaging. I'm also a bit shocked, that such basics are not
> known to other packagers (aren't some of the people that have shown up here
> in the thread even provenpackagers? *shrug*).

Thankyou for your insults and innuendo. If this is how you regularly
express yourself to humans I can see why you are not getting very far
in your end of the discussion. I think everyone who has responded is
quite versed in packages. However, your argument was not about that..
your phrasing was about stealing your intellectual property.

Did Red Hat not do what is proper packaging, yes clearly.

Did they have to? I do not see anything in the MIT or Fedora CLA that
says they needed to do so. And so the breakdown is that there are not
clearly documented processes on that part of the transaction into the
black-box.



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"


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