Axel Thimm wrote:
Maybe the original draft will be picked up by other projects to signal their mode of collaboration, let's see. It certainly was in thge spirit of the existing 3rd party repos.
Maybe you should cut them a little slack considering that they are not so experienced as the rest of you...
Furthermore there have been many quotes in IRC and mail of various current EPEL steering members that they "aim higher" than the existing repos or see EPEL as the only repo long term and the like.
As long as there are policies about what can be in a repo or who can put it there, there can never be just one repo. Everyone should understand that by now.
On the positive side one must say that Max Spevack was interested in a collaboration between EPEL and the rest of the world, but he's not forcing it onto the EPEL people.
I've never quite understood why you don't just give the packages different names if they already exist in the disto-supported repo but there might be some reason to want your version instead (or besides).
-- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
