On 20 March 2014 17:13, Jim Perrin <jperrin(a)centos.org> wrote:
On 03/20/2014 05:15 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I have been thinking about this and wondering if SCL's might be better
> under Robyn's "EPIC" (Extra Packages for Infrastructure and Clouds)
I hate that name, but the idea behind the repo is sound.
Well its like EPEL. If someone can come up with a better name before we
start using it... we can go with that. If no one comes up with a good name
by then it stays with the bad name.
> would be something that could have less rigid rules for keeping
going for
> 12 years that would be more in line with SCL's 2-3 year lifetimes. I was
> going to bring it up as a FLOCK talk to get the ball running with
possible
> interaction with the CentOS group (maybe joining with their SCL
> operations). Does that make sense?
>
It makes sense to me as well. Could you elaborate a bit on how you
envision this working? What role do you see CentOS playing? (yes I'm
impatient and don't want to wait for FLOCK :-P )
Well at the moment it is mostly ganga smoke. The role would be where things
like the Alternative Desktops would go as having a desktop which might not
be backwards compatible and not living longer than 4 years doesn't fit into
how EPEL has packaged things in the past. After that it is a bit hazy.. the
main reason for using CentOS is that this would be something outside of the
core precepts of Fedora and working with CentOS would enable a better
community grouping.
Oh I have one rule. Repotags will be enabled.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project |
http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Stephen J Smoogen.