Re: Re: Mixing RPMforge and EPEL (Was: EPEL repo)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



R P Herrold wrote:

ATM we'll just live and let live, and there will not be any one-side
effort to rectify any compatibility issues EPEL created. It's their
mess, they'll have to clean it up.

Live and let die, you mean - at least as far as the users are concerned. I don't think this issue has any solution other than separate namespaces.

Les

Your issue belongs on another list

Sorry, but I believe that the people affected need to know about it at least as much as the people who control it.

> -- the 'mark by nameing' the rpm's in
a way obvious to a low sophistication user (rather than some checksum based method that does not exist) has been proposed and rejected already.

That misses the point that there may very well be reasons to want to have more than one version installed at once. Every developer should know that there are times you need to at least test 2 different versions of something on the same machine - and they generally know how to do it so they don't conflict. Sadly, the FHS guys seem to live on some planet of perfection where real world issues of version differences and places to store them don't exist, and packagers have followed along with this mistake.

sad, but still the case. We'll be having pain for this for years and years. See:
    https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2007-June/msg00031.html

Please read the archive and the back thread leading up to it. Several @redhat.com showed up to pack the gallery at the 'last chance' epel meeting which could have avoided this train wreck

Reasons for disagreements are pretty much irrelevant to their effect. There is not much reason to ever expect everyone to agree and lots of reasons to provide a mechanism to allow them to disagree in separate spaces. Try to imagine what the internet would be like if DNS did not provide managed hierarchal namespace and anyone could usurp anyone else's domain. That's what we get when different people can put different contents into packages of the same names. And it isn't going to go away until there is a namespace based system that lets the end user choose which he wants. I'd just like to see a little less granularity in that namespace than centos vs. ubuntu...

--
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux