2014-03-21 16:07 GMT+04:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>:
> It doesn't exist, it's an idea that Robyn has floated
semi-seriously
> as a way to provide a repo that moves faster than EPEL. Rather than
> try to jam fast-moving stuff in to EPEL, the idea was to do an Extra
> Packages for Infrastructure and Cloud (EPIC) that had a different,
> faster-moving charter. EPIC would target the *EL platform just as EPEL
> does.
Faster moving rate is great indeed. But adding more than on version of
software (no matter of how many repos it takes) means only one - we
have to impose additional support requiremetns on a packagers.
The "social contract" requiremens for EPEL "support" (which of souce
isn't a "real" support) is way too high for the average maintainer.
That's the reason I believe the entire EPEL idea was a huge mistake
and waste of time - unfortunately I failed to discuss this with other
fellow fedora members during FOSDEM Fedora.NEXT related talks.
I think this is a great place to try out what we can do with CentOS
collaboration, since they're officially "in the family" now. Anyone have
ideas on how best to proceed with that? New SIGs in both projects? A single
new SIG spanning both? (CentOS's new SIGs seem to be a lot more heavyweight
in terms of process than the concept we have for them in Fedora, for better
or worse.) Some new joint upstream to be the meeting point?
No matter of the current situation I'd love to discuss possible ways
to improve it. So count me in as well.
--
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.