> Jon Ciesla wrote: >> FC3 -> RHEL4. >> >> FC6 -> RHEL5. >> >> Presumably, F9 -> RHEL6. >> >> With me so far? > > [Not speaking for Red Hat here. Just my understanding of the process] > > The RHEL 6 time schedule isn't that strict and RHEL release schedules > are not public information and probably won't be till close to release.
So I assumed. >> How is maintainership handled when RHEL is based on a Merged (WRT >> Core/Extras) Fedora? Pre-merge, Core->RHEL and is maintained by RH >> folk, >> and Extras->EPEL, and is maintained by the community. Post-merge, there >> are lots of packages maintained or co-maintained by community folks that >> are either historically Core or might be considered so in the process of >> choosing packages for RHEL6. >> >> Let's say a package was brought into Fedora and is maintained by a >> non-RH >> person, and RH wants to put it in RHEL6. Who maintains it? The current >> maintainer or someone in RH? > > Anything in RHEL has to be maintained by a Red Hat employee. Usually, > the same maintainer who will maintain it for RHEL will also > maintain/co-maintain the Fedora branch too to get continous visibility > into the development. When Red Hat branches off from Fedora to RHEL, > product management will find someone to own the RHEL branch regardless > of how it is managed in Fedora. So if, say, I maintain a package that goes into RHEL, I can expect a new co-maintainer? > What about EPEL? Presumably not an EPEL >> candidate then? > > If it is pulled into RHEL, it is not a EPEL candidate. Perfectly logical. So if it's already in EL-4 and EL-5, we just don't branch for EL-6. I get it. > Rahul > -- novus ordo absurdum _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list