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

Re: nagios shipped by RedHat, but in a specific subscription channel



On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 01:34:34PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Adam Miller
> <maxamillion fedoraproject org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge gmail com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Adam Miller
> >> <maxamillion fedoraproject org> wrote:

> >> "EPEL is purely a complimentary add-on repository and does not replace
> >> packages in RHEL or layered products."
> >>
> >> to
> >>
> >> "EPEL is purely a complimentary add-on repository and does not replace
> >> packages in RHEL. [Package conflicts are determined by what is openly
> >> available from Red Hat's tree (currently located at
> >> ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/) ]
> >>
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > I like it, +1 here. Should we put this to a vote at the next meeting
> > or do we want to take a poll here on the mailing list?
> >
> > -AdamM
> >
> 
> We should take a poll on the list and finalize on Friday meeting.

Imho before there is a decision, the consequences of it should be
explained to people who do not use RHEL. Which packages will this make
remove from EPEL? Afaics, there are 13 repositories involved to find
conflicts, therefore someone who really uses RHEL can probably create a
list of affected packages a lot easier, compare it with EPEL and show
which packages would be removed. This has to be done anyhow if the new
policy is accepted, otherwise you cannot enforce it, so better do it
before the change.

Regards
Till

Attachment: pgp3KsTcRRqaB.pgp
Description: PGP signature


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