>>>> "SJS" == Stephen John Smoogen
<smooge(a)gmail.com> writes:
SJS> OK how can we better explain this in the future?
I really tried, in the "Can I rely on these packages?" section of the
EPEL wiki page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL#Can_I_rely_on_these_packages.3F
Someone already quoted that in a list message. But if people don't read
the relevant web pages then I don't know what we can do. We can't mail
root weekly to remind them that EPEL stuff isn't RHEL stuff and doesn't
come with the same support guarantees. We can't wrap the download of
the epel-release package in a click-through thing where they have to
indicate their understanding.
It's simply true that there will always be someone who, for whatever
reason, ignores everything we say and carries a different understanding
of what EPEL's promise to the community is. It's the same thing that
drives people to say "you took something away from me" when we retire a
package, even though you can still get the package. And to say "you
should support my use case" even though that use case is at odds with
reasonable principles of security. I don't think it's any coincidence
that all three of those have come up in this one thread.
I don't think there's really anything we can do about it besides making
sure the relevant language is available in the right places. And
learning to not be bothered when we've met our promises but not
someone's misunderstanding of what our promises are.
- J<