@FESCo (and in parts maybe for the Board, too): How to handle packaging issues for EPEL?

[Brian Pepple]

On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 15:38 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
> It's afaics like this: The Packaging Committee handles all issues around
> Packaging for both Fedora and EPEL. The EPEL-SIG can define rules about
> maintaining packages in the repo (like for example the "Package
> Maintenance And Updates policy for EPEL
> "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies/PackageMaintenanceAndUpdates
> ), but no exceptions for "theoretical" packaging (e.g. how to write spec
> files) itself.
> 
> Is this correct? Do you guys want something different?

Seems like a reasonable policy.  Is there anyone on the Packaging
Committee that is also involved in EPEL?  If not, there probably should
be.

/B
-- 
Brian Pepple <bpepple at fedoraproject.org>

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B  CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20070318/5cbd9a4c/attachment.bin