[sorry for the delay, maybe too late but here it goes anyway - was way
too busy then and I'm now in the middle of a trip visiting family so
email access is sporadic...]
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:06 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano schrieb:
> On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 15:10 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Josh Boyer schrieb:
>>>> * repotags -- some discussion in the meeting again. It looks like it
>>>> will we'll continue without repotags (final decision probably in
next
>>>> weeks meeting, after this summary has been posted and discussed). If
you
>>>> want repotags please *speak up now*
> I do. But maybe you are just asking for "I do"'s from list
participants
> that do not have a third party repo?
Actually I'm interested in opnions from everyone; but I'm especially
interested in opnions from Fedora/EPEL contributos.
> Rationale for support has been already hashed to death in many threads.
And others that don't see a sense or benefit in repotags (or even think
they do harm) have expressed their opinion as well.
Yes, of course, I did not mean only supporting opinions had been
expressed, that would make this a no-brainer :-)
My personal, biased and most probably incomplete reading of the opposing
opinions include "I wish this would just go away"[*], "this introduces
problems in ordering of packages between repositories", "we are being
forced to do this and we don't want to", "it is a bad solution to the
problem", "it would be a problem to set this up in the epel build
system" and "political problems in consistence between epel and the rest
of fedora". I think most if not all the technical points have had
reasonable technical responses from the proponents (and long time users)
of repotags.
[*] I'm _not_ trying to flame, I actually read this in one of the irc
sessions and I think several emails as well.
>>>> and *help* to find a technical
>>>> solution that is not only fine for the EPEL Steering Committee, but
also
>>>> acceptable for the Fedora Packaging Committee and FESCo -- from
>>>> discussions on list and on IRC it looks like that some members of those
>>>> groups tend to be against using repotags (see this weeks FESCo meeting
>>>> for example) or want to see something cooperation statements signed by
>>>> EPEL and 3rd party repos before they are willing to accept repotags.
>>> Just some clarification. Yes, FESCo overall didn't see a good reason
to
>>> use repotags. If EPEL chooses to do so, FESCo won't stand in the way.
>> FYI: I was a bit against repotags in the past, but my position these
>> days after all this discussions is similar.
>> Or, to be more verbose: If someone works out the details on how to
>> realize repotags in Fedora then (depending on how the proposal looks
>> like) I'll likely abstain from a vote or might even support to use
>> repotags, as long as a simple "cp FC-6/foo.spec EL-5/" remains
possible.
>> But I don't have the energy to work out the details. Anyone willing to
>> work them out?
>
> I presume this is internal help? (meaning how to tweak the build system
> to support them transparently without any impact to the spec files
> themselves?)
No, more meaning: Find a technical and political solution that is
acceptable for EPEL SIG and the Fedora Packaging Committee (and FESCo,
if it wants to ).
And let me warn you: there seems to be a opposition against repotags on
that way from what I can see, so this process might take weeks and
likely lots of discussions and mails. There are high chances to get
frustrated and burned out on the way afaics.
Yeah, I understand that. No offense people, but after reading some of
the recurring threads I was ready to go jump out of the nearest window.
Given the previous threads I personally don't have much hope that
repotags will be ever accepted by the Fedora community and regretfully I
don't have any magical political solution to the problem - it does look
to me that most of the objections are political in nature.
-- Fernando