Jon Ciesla wrote:
> FC3 -> RHEL4.
>
> FC6 -> RHEL5.
>
> Presumably, F9 -> RHEL6.
>
> With me so far?
[Not speaking for Red Hat here. Just my understanding of the process]
The RHEL 6 time schedule isn't that strict and RHEL release schedules
are not public information and probably won't be till close to release.
So I assumed.
> How is maintainership handled when RHEL is based on a Merged
(WRT
> Core/Extras) Fedora? Pre-merge, Core->RHEL and is maintained by RH
> folk,
> and Extras->EPEL, and is maintained by the community. Post-merge, there
> are lots of packages maintained or co-maintained by community folks that
> are either historically Core or might be considered so in the process of
> choosing packages for RHEL6.
>
> Let's say a package was brought into Fedora and is maintained by a
> non-RH
> person, and RH wants to put it in RHEL6. Who maintains it? The current
> maintainer or someone in RH?
Anything in RHEL has to be maintained by a Red Hat employee. Usually,
the same maintainer who will maintain it for RHEL will also
maintain/co-maintain the Fedora branch too to get continous visibility
into the development. When Red Hat branches off from Fedora to RHEL,
product management will find someone to own the RHEL branch regardless
of how it is managed in Fedora.
So if, say, I maintain a package that goes into RHEL, I can expect a new
co-maintainer?
What about EPEL? Presumably not an EPEL
> candidate then?
If it is pulled into RHEL, it is not a EPEL candidate.
Perfectly logical. So if it's already in EL-4 and EL-5, we just don't
branch for EL-6. I get it.
Rahul
--
novus ordo absurdum