On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 03:43:31PM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > Rex Dieter wrote: > >> It's quite a stetch from "no repotags" to > >> conclude "EPEL has no interest" in compatibility. > > >> In fact, epel (and fedora) repo is, by design and policy, supposed to be > >> compatible and considerate of other repos, e.g. most notably, > >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/RepositoryCollaboration > >> (among other project policy documents). > > >> When I posted the aforementioned repository collaboration document to the > >> rpmforge list(s) for comment, it received none. > > > There is talk about cooperation and collaboration, however whenever Axel > > or Dag made any kind of suggestions on the EPEL list, they were not > > given very much "real" consideration. > > Only wrt to repotags. Don't remember any serious/significant discussions > outside of that since. Am I missing something? Lots of things, there was even a face-to-face meeting at LT07. Where it was revealed that it was spot's fault that repotags were killed (but I guess that's just the non-present scape-goat methology) > So, is rpmforge interested in collaboration or not? Does the > RepositoryCollaboration sound like a reasonable starting place? The orginal one, yes, the current one which even lacks the presence of EPEL no. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpI8qCauHZkK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
