On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 10:11:26AM -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:17 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
> the voting/decision on repotags was labeled as being 99% a political
> one, and no one objected against that old statement. Does the outcome
> of EPEL not carrying repotags mean that there is no interest in
> cooperation with 3rd party repos?
>
> I'm not after answers on pseudo-technical details, so consider the
> above question as rhetorical, instead let me rephrase completely
> outside the scope of repotags:
>
> What is EPEL's intended relation to the existing third party repos?
Hi Axel, I'm a bit confused about which statement you are
referring
to in your first sentence, could you please clarify for me?
That voting about repotags is a 99% political decision of playing nice
with other 3rd party repos. The remaining 1% was shared between
confusion between RHEL and EPEL packages and technical implementation.
I'm glad that you brought up this subject directly as I feel it
does
need to be addressed. In your questions, are you referring to all
possible "3rd party" repos, or only to a few of the biggest ones - if
so, which are considered big enough to be considered?
I'm a fair player, I'm not casting away small or new repos. This
sounds like you're running one yourself, which one is it?
In my opinion it is difficult at best to enable multiple repos on a
single machine.
Which is due to lack of coordination of these repos.
Axel, I would also be interested to know what your thoughts are on
the questions you posed to the list. How would you like to see EPEL
and other repos interact (if at all)?
Well, I'm one of the few that voted in favour of EPEL playing nice
with other repos, so I'm interested in a healthy two-way interaction.
--
Axel.Thimm at
ATrpms.net