Summary of the 2008-04-08 Packaging Committee meeting

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at
Tue May 13 21:42:28 UTC 2008

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> But the way we work around that problem is to not use the one that 
>> conflicts.  I think you are suggesting not using fedora unless you 
>> provide a straightforward exclusion method for the conflicting 
>> packages.  is that really what you want people to do?
> You have a bad habit of trying to put words into other people's mouths. 
> Just stop doing that. All distributions have conflicting repositories. 
> You can avoid choosing conflicting repositories or workaround them by 
> assigning a priority or any number of other methods. That's your choice. 
> I have suggested nothing one way or another and implying that I did is 
> just plain lying.

OK, please supply your own words. has a perfectly fine 
repository.  Fedora copies some, but not all of those packages into a 
potentially conflicting repository.  Any argument so far?  You did say 
we learn to work with repository conflicts.  If you don't want me to 
guess what you meant about that, please be specific as to what you think 
someone should do who wants the jpackage versions and their additional 
content now.  How do you work around a distribution's base repository, 
particularly when there are dependencies embedded in other packages?

   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at

More information about the devel mailing list