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
What do you think?
This is what I was trying to get to in the thread recently about
libssh2. However it's still not entirely clear to me.
Does this mean if there's a package foo that is a rhel package, but not
in a module, that it can be overlapped with a foo package thats in a
epel non default module? ie, does it only mean the modular case or does
it mean any rpm?