On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:14:36PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> >> I don't view it as an issue, as long as * the upgrade path is right, >> that is the EPEL package is updated by the corresponding RHEL/EPEL >> package in the next RHEL/EPEL release, which implies some >> coordination with RHEL/EPEL maintainers. > > Well, such coordination in the EPEL past afaics often didn't work that > well (just like it didn't in the Extras days when Extras maintainers had > to deal with maintainers from Fedora Core).
Agreed. I am still quite upset by the lack of coordination around lesstif/openmotif. This could be a prerequisite for the inclusion of those packages. > Well, the 2 I mentioned were (obviously) extreme examples. But as I > said: where draw the line/where stop? People likely have good reasons > for hundred other packages that are basically new versions of software > that is already included in RHEL. I fear that the whole things could get > quite messy over time. As long as the guidelines are followed, including the EPEL specific ones, I can't see what would be wrong. Maybe there could be a guideline to force people to ask on this list before they proceed. -- Pat _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
