On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 10:25:50AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
1. There is always a complaint that Red Hat related projects jump
onto a
single name to the point of overuse. Atomic, -Shift, -Stack, and a couple
others have been ones in just recent memory. Participants in the various
communities feel usually railroaded to use a brand even if they don't think
it wise.
Yesssss, that's a problem. In this case, though, it really *is* directly
related.
2.EPEL has a hard enough time getting Fedora contributions with
various
community members seeing it as a useless diversion. Putting Stream in the
title will just add to the 'why isn't EPEL just in CentOS already so I
don't have to look at those ugly named branches in MY package'.
So, the distinction is: EPEL is in Fedora because it's direct community
ownership and maintenance. CentOS Stream is explicitly Red Hat controlled
with a "patches appreciated!" approach. It's valuable to have both, but I
also like the clarity of the separation.
This all leads me to think that actually what we want is not "EPEL Stream"
but "EPEL for Stream". (epel-for-stream? epel-4-stream? epel4s? no not that
last one for sure.)
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader