I've been checking the packages that won't install on EPEL [1] and found out that drbd-pacemaker cant get installed
because of a missing dependency (pacemaker). While researching why, I saw that pacemaker exists on EPEL7 because it's
provided by the HighAvailability repo, but by policy [2] that repo is not a base for EPEL8 nor EPEL9.

When I asked on how to handle this cases on the steering meeting, some proposed ideas were:

* Rebuild the dependencies as -epel
* Retire the packages
* Bringing back HA & RS repo

The only other package that i've found also has this problem is resalloc-aws that depends on awscli.

Is there a policy on this cases? Are EPEL packages allowed to require packages outside of the policy approved?
I would like more feedback on how to proceed so we can file bugs for this packages correctly.

Package: drbd-pacemaker-9.20.2-1.el9
Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides pacemaker needed by drbd-pacemaker-9.20.2-1.el9.x86_64

Package: resalloc-aws-1.1-1.el9
Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides awscli needed by resalloc-aws-1.1-1.el9.noarch

Package: drbd-pacemaker-9.17.0-1.el8
Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides pacemaker needed by drbd-pacemaker-9.17.0-1.el8.x86_64

[1] https://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/epel/willit/epel8/status-wont-install.html
[2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy/#_policy