On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:50:45AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Reading this proposal and with the EPEL8 experience, where there was
not
even wiki page, where I could state that I don't care about EPEL and I
had to reply into every BZ independently, wouldn't it make sense to move
EPEL into its own dist-git namespace?
I guess that in the CVS days, having EPEL branch was fine. During PkgDB
days, where we could assign maintainer to each branch, it was still
fine. But since we lost this ability, isn't it time to rethink the
setup?
We have the ability back, see the answers from Neal Gompa.
I think this would give more power to EPEL SIG and give relieve
to Fedora packagers.
What you are saying would make sense if there was only the EPEL SIG.
But we also have plenty of packagers who do care about their EPEL packages,
and they would be inconvenienced by such a split. It seems that there
are even people who like to keep one spec file for all branches, incl.
EPEL.
Zbyszek