glusterfs rename

Kaleb S. KEITHLEY kkeithle at
Wed May 30 17:34:33 UTC 2012

On 05/30/2012 01:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:

>> And FWIW, doing nothing doesn't resolve the glusterfs in EPEL versus
>> glusterfs in the RHS Channel issue.
> That's a different story entirely, and why would you want gluster in
> EPEL when it's already in RHEL? What's the difference?

This has been beaten to death already. It's not in RHEL. It's in the RHS 
Channel for RHSA. Some client-side bits will eventually be released in 

And there are more users of EPEL than just RHEL.

And since it's already in EPEL, and has been for a couple of years, as 
glusterfs I'd say the burden is on the RHEL packagers to pick a name 
that doesn't conflict with what's in EPEL. Unless the name gets changed 
before then.



More information about the devel mailing list