<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Matthew Miller <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mattdm@fedoraproject.org" target="_blank">mattdm@fedoraproject.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:51:00PM +0200, Honza Horak wrote:<br>
> However, there are and will be cases where somebody would like to<br>
> create a non-SCL RPM depended on a software collection, which is<br>
> something not solved properly yet and the solution might be quite<br>
> different from collection to collection.<br>
<br>
</span>This makes me kind of scared. I'm all for the first sort of software<br>
collection, but I think limiting this helps constrain the problem set.<br>
<br>
(Although I don't think such packages should be limited from, eg, Fedora<br>
Playground.)
<span class=""></span><br></blockquote></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I'm not sure how/if this matters on Fedora, but for EL, being able to use devtoolset would be a big gain and would allow for inclusion of packages that require a newer compiler than gcc 4.4 that comes with RHEL 6 ( <a href="https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/epel-devel/2013-September/008737.html">https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/epel-devel/2013-September/008737.html</a> ).<br></div></div>