On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 07:54:24AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > I've been saying this for a while as if it's fact, but of course it's not > actually fact until approved, so I'm puting this to the EPEL team to > hopefully do so. > > The current guidelines * say: > > EPEL packages should only enhance and never disturb the Enterprise Linux > distributions they were built for. Thus packages from EPEL should never > replace packages from the target base distribution - including those on the > base distribution as well as layered products; kernel-modules further are > not allowed, as they can disturb the base kernel easily. > > With modularity in EPEL 8, we have the opportunity to allow more flexibility > while preserving the primary goal of not disturbing the base distribution. > Therefore, I propose adding: > > In EPEL 8 or later, it is permitted to have module streams which contain > packages with alternate versions to those provided in RHEL. These packages > may be newer, built with different options, or even older to serve > compatibility needs. These MUST NOT be the default stream -- in every > case, explicit user action must be required to opt in to these versions. > > > (Note that the base package _does not_ have to be part of a module for this > to work.) > > What do you think? > > Nicely and clearly stated.
-- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
