Axel Thimm schrieb:
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 11:25:46AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Axel Thimm schrieb:
>> On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 01:49:26PM -0600, Bernard Johnson wrote:
>>> Axel Thimm wrote:
>> Gosh, contrary to my vanishing sanity I succumb, and I fed the votings
>> with some notes, I even did some research with my FPC hat on on what
>> the best implementation would be and added that as a note, too. Which
>> since it was just *my* FPC hat is just a suggestion about how the FPC
>> may attack this, it is neither part of the EPEL voting, nor a
>> guarantee that the FPC will do so. There may be even smarter and
>> better implementations.
> The critique I issued multiple times somewhere else in this thread still
> is the same: I don't want to give a binding vote on a "Should EPEL carry
> a repotag? If yes, the technical details will be delegated to the
> Packaging Committee." question at this point of time. I want to see what
> burden a repotag might create for packagers before I'll feel safe to
> bless repotags. So I would vote "no" to currently; but I would vote
> "yes" to a question "Should we further investigate the use of a
repotag
> and the technical details how to realize them", as long as someone is
> willing to do the investigating work.
Since you already brought that up and I already answered to that, and
now it's a rehash of the rehash, I'm just going to quote. [...]
Seems we are going in circles. Well, I was just trying to be helpful as
I thought you would be interested in that as that would be the chance to
get me to support your voting, but well, seems this is going nowhere.
CU
thl