>>>>> "SJS" == Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> writes: SJS> OK how can we better explain this in the future? I really tried, in the "Can I rely on these packages?" section of the EPEL wiki page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL#Can_I_rely_on_these_packages.3F Someone already quoted that in a list message. But if people don't read the relevant web pages then I don't know what we can do. We can't mail root weekly to remind them that EPEL stuff isn't RHEL stuff and doesn't come with the same support guarantees. We can't wrap the download of the epel-release package in a click-through thing where they have to indicate their understanding. It's simply true that there will always be someone who, for whatever reason, ignores everything we say and carries a different understanding of what EPEL's promise to the community is. It's the same thing that drives people to say "you took something away from me" when we retire a package, even though you can still get the package. And to say "you should support my use case" even though that use case is at odds with reasonable principles of security. I don't think it's any coincidence that all three of those have come up in this one thread. I don't think there's really anything we can do about it besides making sure the relevant language is available in the right places. And learning to not be bothered when we've met our promises but not someone's misunderstanding of what our promises are. - J< _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
