On 09/18/2013 04:14 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johannbg@xxxxxxxxx) said:
On 09/18/2013 01:24 PM, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
I'm totally on board with moving away from Bugzilla if there are
serious issues with using it. However, EPEL is a Fedora SIG, not
something run by RHEL. And I would totally expect it to be
supported by the Fedora Project.
All the packages already exist and are available in Fedora
Not entirely, there are some packages that are only in EPEL. Aside from
that...
Epel has nothing to do with Fedora absolutely nothing.
If I'm understanding you, you're claiming it *should* have nothing to do
with Fedora. However, it clearly does currently - it was started as a
Fedora project in 2007. It uses the Fedora infrastructure *intentionally*
as an easy way to share resources, share packaging information, share
accounts for packagers, share certain policies, etc.
I can see how and why it had been started as Fedora project for and at
the convenience of RH ( and it's clones ) as opposed to actually get
the EPEL maintainers to maintain that same component for a longer period
of time in Fedora as an part of an LTS release.
Changing this state and severing the relationship would seem to imply 1)
telling the EPEL community they're no longer welcome 2) describing how they
could do something better by separating. I've not seen a compelling
argument for #2 yet, nor a reason the currently relationship is holding back
progress in a way that would require the drastic measures of #1.
Given that you could not see a compelling argument changing the command
prompt to long hostname for the benefit of administrators or if as you
expressed it would take up to much rel-estate space and then propose to
do the opposite and remove the short hostname for it, which would have
in turn removed the confusing part that the short hostnames are and in
turn forced administrators to run command to realise which host they are
working ( which they have to do anyway with regards to short hostnames
) I can understand why that you dont see a compallance in the argument
I'm making but that wont change the fact that the spec file are being
cluttered for epel or rhel compatibility, something those maintainers
should be keep in a separated branch away from Fedora.
Btw it makes perfect sense that EPEL and RHEL share the same bugzilla
instance but not Fedora.
JBG
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
