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

Re: package stability



On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 08:46:16AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >  
> I'll make a deal with you, if you can pay our volunteers what RH pays 
> its engineers to do the type of backporting required to make the ABI's 
> stay the same and we'll see to it that the EPEL packages are just like 
> the RHEL ones.  Otherwise this is a lesson in learning that you can't 

I don't get it. Fedora extras is run by volunteers that are not paid
by RH, still is is ver successfull. Why do you want somebody to pay?
Why not rely on volunteers? It is all EPEL is about?

> _make_ volunteers do anything and this, we're left with best effort.  In 

That is always true. It is always best effort. But it is pointless to 
say, hey, let's put this package in EPEL, although we know we won't be
able to keep the API/ABI stability. What I am saying is that it seems
better to have a goal of API/ABI compatibility and do our best to
achieve it, and don't start with saying API/ABI compatibility is not a
goal.

--
Pat


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