The MinGW packages for EPEL 7 are in a very bad state. We haven't even started on EPEL 8 yet.
Should we discontinue support for EPEL?
Does anyone have any use case for EPEL?
I'm going to retire my EPEL branches, but if anyone wants to take them over please go ahead.
Thanks, Michael
On 8/24/19 22:46, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
The MinGW packages for EPEL 7 are in a very bad state. We haven't even started on EPEL 8 yet.
Should we discontinue support for EPEL?
Does anyone have any use case for EPEL?
I'm going to retire my EPEL branches, but if anyone wants to take them over please go ahead.
Yes, I'd say go ahead and retire them. We are having enough trouble with keeping Fedora MinGW packages up to date and there's no need to complicate it with yet another branch.
Kalev
On Sun, Aug 25, 2019, 8:16 AM Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/24/19 22:46, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
The MinGW packages for EPEL 7 are in a very bad state. We haven't even started on EPEL 8 yet.
Should we discontinue support for EPEL?
Does anyone have any use case for EPEL?
I'm going to retire my EPEL branches, but if anyone wants to take them over please go ahead.
Yes, I'd say go ahead and retire them. We are having enough trouble with keeping Fedora MinGW packages up to date and there's no need to complicate it with yet another branch
What would it take to keep it working? I know of several organizations using it. I would wager that a lot of EPEL users aren't public, so tracking user impact is difficult.
On Sun, Aug 25, 2019, 8:16 AM Kalev Lember <kalevlember@gmail.com mailto:kalevlember@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, I'd say go ahead and retire them. We are having enough trouble with keeping Fedora MinGW packages up to date and there's no need to complicate it with yet another branch
What would it take to keep it working? I know of several organizations using it. I would wager that a lot of EPEL users aren't public, so tracking user impact is difficult.
Someone who actually uses EPEL should maintain them.
Sandro