On 6/30/20 9:10 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 30. 06. 20 21:03, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I don't think a package-review is needed? It would just be unretiring
the fedora branches of an existing package?
Technically, the package is "retired for 8+ weeks" on Fedora. Hence a
new review request.
That said, I am -1 on the idea.
You have no idea how many people try to install epel packages on fedora.
We had to explicitly add a Conflicts to try and reduce this, and that
was with them in another repo entirely!
I fear if we do this more people will start installing stuff from epel
on fedora and cause a lot of breakage.
I understand the concern, but am not considering it a blocker for
this, especially since people will find a way to download the epel
packages anyway. This does not allow `dnf install epel-release` on
Fedora neither are the repos enabled. The amount of work to actually
use this package to install epel packages on Fedora is more or less
the same as downloading the packages from Koji or EPEL mirrors.
+1 from me. People will always do weird things, if they want rope, I say
let them have it.
But that shouldn't stop us from making life easier for packagers. I
myself would use this.
Tomas
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
