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

Re: EPEL acceptance policy

Does CentOS or another distro recompile/package the other RH channels
that are not RHEL?  I mean, if EPEL is people looking for best-effort
supported packges, might they want the application server under
best-effort rather than through a pay channel?  I am not saying we
should replace the channels, really I am mostly curious.


On 3/12/07, Tim Burke <tburke redhat com> wrote:
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Well the one problem I can see that is a bootstrap problem.. if RHEL
> picks up some subset of EPEL packages for its own subchannel. However,
> that is really nitpicking something to death.
Good point.  In this case I think the package would naturally stop
evolving in EPEL, as the incentive for inclusion would be removed.
However, that transition (exit?) would be purely voluntary on the part
of the EPEL pkg maintainer ... as RH isn't going to "force" it.

Similarly, what to do if a package is included in RHEL5 but not in
RHEL4. I would think its fair game for EPEL to build the RHEL4 version
but not the RHEL5 version.

epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list redhat com

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