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

Re: "newer packages"



On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 12:28:35 -0500 (CDT)
Mike McGrath <mmcgrath redhat com> wrote:

> Should we have a stronger effort to replace older RHEL packages if we
> put them in their own namespace and don't conflict?

Well, how much interest is there in this? 
How many packages would we have? 

Can the interesting ones that people want really be made to not
conflict with the base RHEL versions? 

This would be a totally seperate 'epel-bleeding' or
'epel-newer-versions' repo? 

> This is sort of a nuanced problem since RHEL5 doesn't feel nearly as
> old as RHEL4 did at this point in it's release cycle.  But still,
> people do want newer versions of these packages.

Yeah, perhaps we should brainstorm a list of these and see how possible
it is to make versions that don't conflict. I suspect in some cases
it's going to be nearly impossible. ;( 

> 	-Mike

kevin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


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