On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:19:20 +0100 Till Maas <opensource till name> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 04:49:08PM -0600, BJ Dierkes wrote: > > > Log: > > http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-02-12/fedora-meeting.2010-02-12-20.59.log.html > > From the log: > 21:19:15 <stickster> so that engineers inside Red Hat understand they > need to be working with EPEL as an upstream > 21:19:27 <derks> that's great > 21:19:52 <stickster> The unanimous response I got from the folks I > talked to was, "Yup, we're doing that now, and will keep doing so" > > This seems not to have worked for "python-setuptools", because when it > was added to RHEL, an older version that the on in EPEL was used. Also > the RHEL package does not provide "python-setuptools-devel". A related > ignored bug report is: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460631 > > For this package, it EPEL land it does not look better, as the CVS > does not contain a dead.package: > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/python-setuptools/EL-5/ Perhaps we can get stickster to communicate that back to RHEL folks. Or give us some more direct way of doing so. I will ask him to comment on this thread. > Also there seems to be no trace about the whole situation. Also it > seems that more or less any documentation regarding EPEL is not > maintained, e.g. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL contains a log > of stale content: > > Latest report on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Reports is from > 2008, week 17 I can clean that up. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. We no longer do regular reports. > Also the "Getting a Fedora package in EPEL"[0] procedure is not in > sync with what CVS admins require, as they might require a > confirmation that a maintainer has been asked: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243716#c15 > But this is not what the procedure describes. > > [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Getting_a_Fedora_package_in_EPEL I can add clarification there. Basically he was just asking: "have you talked to the Fedora maintainer about maintaining this in EPEL". The answer could just have been "yes, I have". kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature