Michael Stahnke schrieb:
On 2/23/07, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen schrieb:
> My 2 cent:
> Agreed for Camp1 -- it should be left to people who are going to be paid
> for it.
> For the other stuff: I'm targeting something like a mix in the middle
> between Camp2 and Camp3 (with some bits of Camp1 maybe) for EPEL (maybe
> a bit more closer to Camp2 than Camp3). Always the latest stuff IMHO is
> what we have Fedora for; I also think that's its unrealistic to even try
> to always ship the latest apps: Just try now to build a certain apps
> from Extras for RHEL4 -- you will run into trouble now and then, as
> RHEL4 ships with gtk2-2.4, but there are quite a few apps these days
> that require gtk2-2.6.
Has the demand for one particular type of application been higher than
another? For example, most shops I see with RHEL/CentOS are in
runlevel 3, so QT/GTK applications are minimal. Is anyone seeing
things that are different?
Well, I assume that besides those that run RHEL/CentOS on Servers in
runlevel 3 there are a lot of people out there that run it on their
workstation; Fedora afaics moves to fast for a lot of people that prefer
to have a "stable" desktop -- they afaics prefer to only upgrade their
machine all 18-24 months (or even more seldom) to a new release.
Also, will things like Tremulous be
allwoed in EPEL?
/me looks up what tremulous -- ohh, a "First Person Shooter game based
on the Quake 3 engine", that why I don't know about it.
Well, I didn't build the games I maintain for EPEL yet, but I suppose
some people expect them to find in EPEL. I think we should ship them, if
the maintainer wants, but games IMHO have not a high priority.
CU
thl