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

Re: Introduction of overlapping postfix26 package in EPEL-5?



Thank you BJ for following up on this,

BJ Dierkes <wdierkes 5dollarwhitebox org> a écrit:

> On Apr 20, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>
>> Thank you for bringing this up.  As was not aware of IUS myself and I am
>> glad to learn about it.  I have one question though.  Why can't IUS be a
>> Fedora branch, like EPEL?  Both would be separate, but would still
>> leverage the (IMHO) wonderful Fedora infrastructure and mindshare.
>
> We did have that very discussion in #fedora-meeting over a year ago,
> and at the time it was decided that... EPEL itself has enough
> challenges in packaging and maintaining itself that adding another
> repo was just not in the cards.  Ultimately we decided any packagers
> interested should participate in IUS and that merging IUS under Fedora
> Project wasn't feasible at the time.  

OK.  Good to know.  At least the topic got discussed.

> We [IUS] are certainly open to talks regarding this topic of having an
> 'IUS' repo under Fedora (that sits next to EPEL)... which I think is a
> better conversation than allowing IUS type packages in EPEL.

I think having an IUS repo under Fedora that sits next to EPEL is the
right to do as well, barring of course the possible practical
difficulties that it would imply.

> Perhaps a topic for next epel meeting.  My only concern with that
> is... IUS has a pretty niche audience, and a very specific purpose in
> the grand scheme of things.  Fedora/EPEL would really need to weight
> the pros and cons on whether it makes sense to go down that path or
> not.

Indeed.

Thank you for sharing this insight.

-- 
		Dodji


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