On 28 May 2012 23:04, inode0 <[email protected]> wrote: >> Well then the only way I can see to meet your point would be to stop EPEL. > > I'm not sure it is that dire. Do we know if Red Hat cares about EPEL > providing complete RHEL Add-Ons? If they don't then my concern is > gone. >
As in all cases, there is no Red Hat, there are 4000 different Red Hatters. We have groups (like IPA, Directory Services, Gluster, and some others) who rely on EPEL so that they can give customer who want to see where things are going but don't run Fedora because it is too far advanced from what they are running. You have other groups who really don't care and say "Well if someone is running EPEL and our conflicts, that is their problem." and we have consultants who end up having to fix those problems. And finally you have EPEL being a project run on Fedora servers by volunteers. None of us are paid to work on it, even in Fedora Infrastructure. We do so because it fits our needs, is useful to us, and for the most part is fun. Remove those and there is no need for it. In order for EPEL to build against those channels it would require changes to Koji and the infrastructure. Some of the channels are not meant to be run on the same channel (one provides foo-1.2.3 and another provides foo-2.1.3.) it will require knowing that if you are building X that you required foo-2 and not foo-1 (or vice versa). -- Stephen J Smoogen. "The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance." Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University. "Years ago my mother used to say to me,... Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." —James Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
