EPEL EPIC! [was Re: and SCL]

[Peter Lemenkov]

2014-03-21 16:07 GMT+04:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>:

>> It doesn't exist, it's an idea that Robyn has floated semi-seriously
>> as a way to provide a repo that moves faster than EPEL. Rather than
>> try to jam fast-moving stuff in to EPEL, the idea was to do an Extra
>> Packages for Infrastructure and Cloud (EPIC) that had a different,
>> faster-moving charter. EPIC would target the *EL platform just as EPEL
>> does.

Faster moving rate is great indeed. But adding more than on version of
software (no matter of how many repos it takes) means only one - we
have to impose additional support requiremetns on a packagers.

The "social contract" requiremens for EPEL "support" (which of souce
isn't a "real" support) is way too high for the average maintainer.
That's the reason I believe the entire EPEL idea was a huge mistake
and waste of time - unfortunately I failed to discuss this with other
fellow fedora members during FOSDEM Fedora.NEXT related talks.

> I think this is a great place to try out what we can do with CentOS
> collaboration, since they're officially "in the family" now. Anyone have
> ideas on how best to proceed with that? New SIGs in both projects? A single
> new SIG spanning both? (CentOS's new SIGs seem to be a lot more heavyweight
> in terms of process than the concept we have for them in Fedora, for better
> or worse.) Some new joint upstream to be the meeting point?

No matter of the current situation I'd love to discuss possible ways
to improve it. So count me in as well.


-- 
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.