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

Re: Packages duplicated between EL-5 sub-channels and EPEL

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Ray Van Dolson <rayvd bludgeon org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 09:44:01PM -0600, inode0 wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Michael Stahnke <mastahnke gmail com> wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> > If EPEL would pull all of those packages it would become basically
>> > useless to me.
>> I don't really see how pulling all those packages can be the direction
>> we go. Way too disruptive to EPEL users at this point.
> Guess they could be moved to an "epel-unpure" repository. :)
> (In favor of the status quo personally not having read all the
> discussion yet...)

Having given this some more thought here is what I think we should try to do.

(1) Allow things that come from layered products to be replaced (here
I am defining layered products as being those from channels not
associated with AP).

(2) Try to keep a current list of conflicts so they can be easily
excluded from the EPEL repo by the user in advance (i.e., at EPEL
configuration time) and announce new conflicts somewhere so the
exclude list can be kept up to do more or less to minimize conflicts
for those who just don't want them. Having such a current list
commented out in the epel-release might work really well for the

That is a little extra work to help those who want only the "pure"
version of the repo by enabling them to do something to create it and
would let people who don't care about it just go on about their
business as usual.


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