Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 06:42:55AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> I'm with Mike here, that EPEL simply make a best effort, to be more in
> line with what (Fedora) Extras does.
As a user I enjoy centos for its stability, including ABI stability, and I
guess other also do. If adding the main EPEL repo breaks that I think it
will be of much less use.
I'll make a deal with you, if you can pay our volunteers what RH pays
its engineers to do the type of backporting required to make the ABI's
stay the same and we'll see to it that the EPEL packages are just like
the RHEL ones. Otherwise this is a lesson in learning that you can't
_make_ volunteers do anything and this, we're left with best effort. In
this case its the spirit of the rule more so then the actual rule.
In Fedora Extras there is a best effort to be latest and greatest. It
the exact opposite, we cannot be in line with what is done for fedora.
Yep, we want best effort for stability, not latest and greatest.
Having packages packagers cannot reasonably commmit to keep ABI
stability in a separate repo under the EPEL umbrella would seem right
to me, however