On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Kevin Fenzi<kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 12:28:35 -0500 (CDT)
Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Should we have a stronger effort to replace older RHEL packages if we
> put them in their own namespace and don't conflict?
Well, how much interest is there in this?
How many packages would we have?
Can the interesting ones that people want really be made to not
conflict with the base RHEL versions?
This would be a totally seperate 'epel-bleeding' or
'epel-newer-versions' repo?
epel-sid (if it compiles, ship it!)
The issues are how to deal with this cleanly (if that is possible). I
know that there are people who need newer versions of postgres, mysql
etc just to get apps working.. but they also run into the "we need a
newer python" which uhm would be very interesting to try and deal
with.
> This is sort of a nuanced problem since RHEL5 doesn't feel
nearly as
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for?
-- Robert Browning