On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
- Patrice Dumas [12/10/2008 14:43] :
I really can't see how you can say that. Look at the setup of rpmfusion,
Rpmfusion chose to duplicate the Fedora infrastructure (bugzilla, CVS+FAS, mailman, the works). This is much more difficult and goes above and beyond the requirements for a third party repo to get started.
for example, it is clearly not something I can undertake myself.
Once again, if you do not have the manpower to setup an infrastructure, you do not have the manpower to support @code + @base . This is why you need to start by building a community.
But the first question should be why a separate community is necessary. Why is it not possible for one of fedora's goals to be to provide a clean transition to RHEL or Centos at the end of certain development cycles, at which point EPEL/Rpmfusion, etc. would be unnecessary as separate entities since that fedora cycle's repository would be directly usable as-is and would simply need to be maintained instead of the various 3rd party versions that have been necessary to fill this void?
It would take a change in the branching of EL from Fedora. In the past, EL's product cycle has required that it be branched on its timeline NOT fedora's. So if Fedora is late, then the branch is taken anyway and people start working on that to meet the EL roadmap. Thus EL-3 is branched not from RH-9 but RH-9 beta. EL-4 is branched from FC-3 beta ad EL-5 FC-6 beta.
Because packages are pushed into a release that hae major changes (FC-6 final and RHEL-5 are very different in various packages so you have to be careful getting some stuff moved over.) For the branching to work it would need to be done at the END of a cycle. So instead of RHEL-6 being based off of Fedora-11 it would need to be based off of Fedora-8 when mainline does not make changes to it anymore.