Relationship to existing 3rd party repos/CentOS/SL?

[Dag Wieers]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Tim Jackson wrote:

> Axel Thimm wrote:
> 
> > Does the outcome of EPEL not carrying repotags mean that there is no 
> > interest in cooperation with 3rd party repos?
> 
> Again, I think you're extrapolating too far here. It seems many people are
> "ambivalent" about the repo-tag thing, myself included. I can live with it, I
> can live without it. I don't really care. (Maybe I should, and maybe it's some
> kind of failure that I don't, but that's how it is). I think you're assuming
> that everyone feels as strongly about this as you do (either positive or
> negative), whereas they don't, and you're thus inferring a strong feeling that
> isn't there, that by not

Well, maybe it isn't there inside of the Fedora community. But all the 
other repositories know better. We represent more people (and definitely 
more people in the RHEL/CentOS community) than EPEL currently does.

Still, nobody listens to the voice me or Axel represents. And I'm sure 
opponents like to minimize what it represents or the value it has.

Fact is that RPMforge and AtRPMS will now drop the repotag now that Fedora 
rejected the idea. Have fun sorting through a mess where there are 
different eg. clamav packages with the same version-release and different 
content. That's what you get when you do not differentiate packages.

Fedora/EPEL is actively making sure people cannot use packages from 
different sources so they can tell people 'we warned you not to use 
different sources'. It's a shame that such tactics are being used again.

The bad thing is that EPEL will not be able to accomodate all the 
RHEL/CentOS users even if they want to because you have different needs 
and therefor different policies. So what worked for Fedora may backfire 
with RHEL/CentOS.

Kind regards,
--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]