On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:14:36PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
> I don't view it as an issue, as long as * the upgrade path is right,
> that is the EPEL package is updated by the corresponding RHEL/EPEL
> package in the next RHEL/EPEL release, which implies some
> coordination with RHEL/EPEL maintainers.
Well, such coordination in the EPEL past afaics often didn't work that
well (just like it didn't in the Extras days when Extras maintainers had
to deal with maintainers from Fedora Core).
Agreed. I am still quite upset by the lack of coordination around
lesstif/openmotif. This could be a prerequisite for the inclusion of
those packages.
Well, the 2 I mentioned were (obviously) extreme examples. But as I
said: where draw the line/where stop? People likely have good reasons
for hundred other packages that are basically new versions of software
that is already included in RHEL. I fear that the whole things could get
quite messy over time.
As long as the guidelines are followed, including the EPEL specific
ones, I can't see what would be wrong. Maybe there could be a guideline
to force people to ask on this list before they proceed.
--
Pat