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

Re: Conversations with centos-devel

Hash: SHA1

On 09/18/2010 11:10 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 11:40:28 -0600
> Stephen John Smoogen <smooge gmail com> wrote:
>> I sent a ping a while back on putting in a weight of 2000 for EPEL-6
>> and the general consensus was that it did not matter to them what we
>> did. [More or less.] So I would say that when we update the
>> epel-release next time to put it in the epel.repo. [And make sure we
>> announce it for partners.]
> And if we do that, we should be able to clone RHEL Workstation packages
> (the ones not in RHEL Server) and put them EPEL without causing issues
> for RHEL Workstation users...
> Shouldn't we?

I'm of the opinion that we should still not do this, except for extreme
situations.  EPEL was not meant to be an end-run around RHEL packages or
RHEL pricing, and while we could technically do it and have less chance
of hurting people's systems, I don't think EPEL is the place for that.
There is plenty of room for a slightly more removed repository from EPEL
where one could provide updated versions of packages.

- -- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- FreedomĀ² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


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