Collaboration

[Johnny Hughes]

On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 15:19 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 4/25/07, Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Answer to both ... EPEL wants to be "THE" Master 3rd Party repo, not
> > just a 3rd Party Repo.  There can be no misinterpreting that, it is just
> > plain fact.
> >
> 
> Or it wants to be another repository. There are multiple reasons for
> multiple repositories containing the same RPM with different options.
> No one repository is going to meet those needs and no one repository
> is going to rule them all. But we all seem to be forgetting that (me
> included in a nice rant that was almost as long as this one that I
> didnt send because I couldnt find an appropriate Devils Advocate
> definition).

Well ... I don't think that is true for most packages ... but could be
true for some packages.

I would think that for the vast majority of packages, we could work out
a viable definition and build them in one place.  That one place could
be any of the major players ... and without a good reason, we should
make assignments of master repos for individual packages.  All the
binaries and sources are published for every repo, so that is not hard.

It is not good for users to have incompatible versions of packages
hanging around, unless there is a specific reason (IMHO).

We should at least, in my opinion, agree on a consolidated group of SPEC
files.

The problem is ... this whole discussion is not on equal footing.  Why
do RPMForge (Dag), ATRPMS (Axel), KDE-Redhat(Rex), CentOS Extras
(Karanbir) count as one vote each to EPEL ... those people are running
viable EL enabled Repositories right now that have millions of users
combined.  EPEL has no current users.

I am not trying to be negative, but "it seems that" EPEL just assumes
that they will be the defacto standard in this space ... and I am trying
to understand how that helps system admins who are trying to deploy EL
packages ... or admins who already have those packages deployed from the
current repos.

In another post, someone suggested that these Repos are minimal
things ... but to put this in perspective, CentOS around 200 mirrors and
millions of users.  The majority of CentOS users use RPMForge or CentOS
Extras already ... and many also use ATRPMS and KDE-Redhat.  Those
things already exist and they serve millions of users today.  Yet it
seems that a new player comes into this space and all the current people
are supposed to stop what they are doing and start doing things the new
way.  It just seems backwards to me is all ... maybe I am missing
something?
 
<snip>

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20070425/e7409ac5/attachment.sig>