I'm not involved with the EPEL base itself, but have an interest..
On 06/15/2012 05:43 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
"EPEL6 will not normally ship packages that are shipped already
following RHEL channels: os, optional, lb, and ha. Any overlapping
packages must be to provide binary packages on arches not provided by
RHEL ( following:
Additional channels may be added to this list, based on a criteria the
EPEL sig has yet to decide on."
What is the overall appetite for expanding scope rather than reducing
scope ? i.e could something like this work :
- the base repo can only contain stuff that isnt in 'os', 'optional',
'lb' and 'ha'. For existing packages moved into those channels post-
point 0 release, the responsibility to notify epel should fall on the
- a secondary repo, can then contain anything that meets the license
terms of Fedora acceptance - i.e be open source and all that. This paves
the way for a newer mysql or an alternate postfix build to then come
into 'community' hands.
nutshell: rather than find ways to do less, and create more barriers -
find a way to do more and have fewer barriers.
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/
ICQ: 2522219 | Yahoo IM: z00dax | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc