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

EPEL conflicts with RHEL channels (was: Possible new maintainer)



I wrote:
> This might be the thread we were thinking about:
>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2010-December/msg00102.html
>
> That means that facter and puppet are violating this. :(
>
> They have been doing so for years.  I strongly suspect that they were
> in EPEL before they got added to MRG and no one noticed at the time.
> I started helping with the packages in Fedora/EPEL around the 0.24.6
> timeframe, but they entered EPEL in July of 2006, it appears.

After talking a little in #epel, Kevin pointed out that EPEL has
primarily agreed to not conflict with packages in RHEL AS, but not in
various other add-on channels.

http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/epel/epel.2010-01-15-21.00.log.html#l-134

The caveat to this is that we'll consider requests from RHEL folks to
no ship things.  Obviously, no one wants to cause problems.

David, do you know if the MRG folks have issues with facter and puppet
in EPEL?  As I said, those packages have been in EPEL for years, so
I'm not sure there's anything to be gained by trying to block them at
this point.  We're already way past MRG in terms of NVR's.  But if
there are ways we can help alleviate issues for MRG users, I'm game to
try.

-- 
Todd        OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After all, there is no position so absurd that you cannot get a great
many people to assume it.
    -- Gore Vidal

Attachment: pgp3NJZhxfP0v.pgp
Description: PGP signature


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