I'm about to submit tomcat-native (also known as libtcnative, tcnative) for review in Fedora, but my primary interest for it is EL-5, specifically CentOS 5. But before doing that, I'd like to verify that it is not already available in some RHEL 5 channels and that the package won't cause problems if it's shipped in EPEL 5, if I should adjust something etc. For CentOS 5 it's fine, but I don't have a RHEL 5 box at the moment that I could use to check for possible conflicts and the like.

Is there a complete list of all binary packages included in all RHEL channels that EPEL should be compatible with available somewhere? Complete public binary repodatas (just the metadata, not packages) of binary packages included in them would be nice.

Ok, that just amplifies the point that the information requested below seems to be critical prerequisite for inclusion of *any* package in EPEL. Steering committee, please process this request with high priority. > > Is there a complete list of all binary packages included in all RHEL > > channels that EPEL should be compatible with available somewhere? > > Complete public binary repodatas (just the metadata, not packages) of > > binary packages included in them would be nice.

On 8/21/07, Karsten Wade <kwade(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 15:05 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > > Ok, that just amplifies the point that the information requested below seems > > to be critical prerequisite for inclusion of *any* package in EPEL. Steering > > committee, please process this request with high priority. > > > > > > Is there a complete list of all binary packages included in all RHEL > > > > channels that EPEL should be compatible with available somewhere? > > > > Complete public binary repodatas (just the metadata, not packages) of > > > > binary packages included in them would be nice. > > There are a lot of people here with knowledge of how Red Hat works. > > Is there an impediment to getting that list? > > -- > Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project > Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject > quaid.fedorapeople.org | gpg key: AD0E0C41 > ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel-list mailing list > epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list > > > Can someone detail out what information is being looked for? Also, what channels in RHN would some of this stuff fall under. I think that tomcat and lots o' other java stuff is in some developer channels. We'll need to iron the whole thing out.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 8/21/07, Michael Stahnke <mastahnke(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > On 8/21/07, Karsten Wade <kwade(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 15:05 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > > > > > > Ok, that just amplifies the point that the information requested below seems > > > > to be critical prerequisite for inclusion of *any* package in EPEL. Steering > > > > committee, please process this request with high priority. > > > > > > > > > > Is there a complete list of all binary packages included in all RHEL > > > > > > channels that EPEL should be compatible with available somewhere? > > > > > > Complete public binary repodatas (just the metadata, not packages) of > > > > > > binary packages included in them would be nice. > > > > > > There are a lot of people here with knowledge of how Red Hat works. > > > > > > Is there an impediment to getting that list? > > > > Can someone detail out what information is being looked for? Also, > > what channels in RHN would some of this stuff fall under. I think > > that tomcat and lots o' other java stuff is in some developer > > channels. We'll need to iron the whole thing out. > > Well there is the "Extras" which contains non-FLOSS code and some > kernel modules that arent in the main-line I think. The only other > stuff that would be not on CentOS-4/5 that is on RHN would be the RHX > channels. I think there's more than just RHX/Extras. Everything that is in RHN and that is not available from ftp.redhat.com in RPM or SRPM format. There are beta-channels that are not offered as SRPM afaik. But it's hard to list things that you don't know exist :) Someone with full RHN access could simply verify for himself. Also, it would be useful to have everything that cannot be distributed available in nosrc format as well. Kind regards, -- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors] _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 06:20:47PM -0500, Michael Stahnke wrote: > Can someone detail out what information is being looked for? Also, > what channels in RHN would some of this stuff fall under. I think > that tomcat and lots o' other java stuff is in some developer > channels. We'll need to iron the whole thing out. Tomcat is a standard part of RHEL5 and thus in the regular channels, like much other Java stuff, that was formerly (pre-RHEL5) known as the "Red Hat Application Server".

On 26.08.2007 19:56, Michael Stahnke wrote: > I haven't forgotten about this topic, but I am still at a loss for > direction toward a solution. I can use the RHN API to pull in a lot > of information about RHEL channels and such, but there are 400+ > channels in RHN, and virtually no metadata. I suppose the metadata > could somehow be derived, but that is a moving target. I think the point got mentioned in a meeting a bit, but not further discussed: Why can't we simply run a small script on one or two (RHEL5Desktop and RHEL5Server) machines somewhere that just write the informations into some files and uploads those somewhere? That way we might not provide all the data people might be interested it, but a package-list (which would be a good start) and some other stuff afaics should be possible, which is better than nothing.

On Monday 27 August 2007, Kyle Gonzales wrote: > On 8/27/07, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info&gt; wrote: > > > > Why can't we simply run a small script on one or two (RHEL5Desktop and > > RHEL5Server) machines somewhere that just write the informations into > > some files and uploads those somewhere? > > > > That way we might not provide all the data people might be interested > > it, but a package-list (which would be a good start) and some other > > stuff afaics should be possible, which is better than nothing. > > Do you need a listing for the layered products as well, or just the > base/extra/supplementary RHEL channels? I think the EPEL project needs to decide, enumerate and document the exact channels, derived distributions etc it attempts to be compatible with first. The answer to the above question would then be those channels etc.

Personally I think documenting these processes is a lot of work with questional benefit. It seems to me more logical to be reactive to this.

When something comes up that is a conflict, remove / fix it in epel.

I'm just saying that trying to put strict guidelines/lists around something that is very murky requires a lot of effort and the outcome is bound to be unreliable. The fact is what RH does or does not decide to ship is up to them and it is a completely unpredictable unordered process which we are trying to bring order to. That said, if someone wants to do the work and thinks they can make it reliable, have at it :)