Quoting Eric H. Christensen (2012-12-10 22:51:11) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > The last week or so has seen a couple of patches going into fop in the Fedora > repositories. I recently became a co-maintainer of fop in EPEL5 and was > trying to bring fop into current there. Unfortunately there are many > dependency failures there that it's going to be a lot of work to bring it up > to where we need it. The actual need, from my point of view, is to get > Publican working properly. fop provides the engine for creating PDFs in > Publican and is a necessary function for the Fedora Docs project. That said, > the current version of Publican in EPEL5 is very old and outdated. Near > current version of Publican is already in EPEL6 and I believe fop is in RHEL6 > repositories. > > I say all that to ask this: Is anyone currently using fop or Publican in > EPEL5 or can we get rid of those bits? > > I have no problem working to bring fop upto speed in EPEL5 if someone needs > it but I'd hate to do all the work if no one is using it.
Regardless of fop being out of date in EPEL I believe EPEL guidelines[1] strongly discourage big updates from flowing in. Quoting: The packages in the repository should, if possible, be maintained in similar ways to the Enterprise Packages they were built against. In other words: have a mostly stable set of packages that normally to not change at all and only changes if there are good reasons for it -- so no "hey, there is a new version, it builds, let's ship it" mentality. So I'd say: don't rebase fop at all. It's against the guidelines in the first place [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Package_maintenance_and_update_policy -- Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotni...@redhat.com> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
