On 20 March 2014 17:13, Jim Perrin <jperrin@centos.org> wrote:

On 03/20/2014 05:15 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

> I have been thinking about this and wondering if SCL's might be better
> under Robyn's "EPIC" (Extra Packages for Infrastructure and Clouds)

I hate that name, but the idea behind the repo is sound.

Well its like EPEL. If someone can come up with a better name before we start using it... we can go with that. If no one comes up with a good name by then it stays with the bad name.

> would be something that could have less rigid rules for keeping going for
> 12 years that would be more in line with SCL's 2-3 year lifetimes. I was
> going to bring it up as a FLOCK talk to get the ball running with possible
> interaction with the CentOS group (maybe joining with their SCL
> operations). Does that make sense?
>

It makes sense to me as well. Could you elaborate a bit on how you
envision this working? What role do you see CentOS playing? (yes I'm
impatient and don't want to wait for FLOCK :-P )

Well at the moment it is mostly ganga smoke. The role would be where things like the Alternative Desktops would go as having a desktop which might not be backwards compatible and not living longer than 4 years doesn't fit into how EPEL has packaged things in the past. After that it is a bit hazy.. the main reason for using CentOS is that this would be something outside of the core precepts of Fedora and working with CentOS would enable a better community grouping.

Oh I have one rule. Repotags will be enabled.

--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77

_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Stephen J Smoogen.