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

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



Petr "Qaxi" Klíma wrote:
Les Mikesell napsal(a):

Correct, you would think Fedora took care of this, right ? But there is no interest for Fedora to take care of that because they want to be the only repository. It is not something they have an incentive for to fix.

That is exactly the problem. The repotag would be a workaround (and a convenient one for users) but the real changes need to be in yum or somewhere else. And Fedora does not care, so RHEL will not have it.

I have warned for this on the Feodra mailinglist years ago. There just is no interest to have the diversity of more than one repository.

What value does diversity add when the end user can't select which one he wants or load all of them? I understand the scenario where a single repository has a policy that prohibits certain packages from being included, but the only conflicts in those cases should be where an incomplete version is packaged in one place under the same name as the full version in a place with a different policy. The more common case would just be additional packages or packages with different names.

From an end-user viewpoint, I can't see why anyone would want to maintain a potentially-conflicting package of something that can be freely distributed and keep it in an isolated repository, especially without any mechanism to control which will be installed. Can you explain the reason anyone would want to have diversity instead of a single maintainer per package and the same packages in all repositories whose policies find them acceptable?

Diversity adds a lot of value. If EPEL will be only repo nobody on RHEL workstation can see/listen MP3, WMA, DVD playing, because of interesting US software patent and millenium act law.

That's not what I meant. Obviously we need additional packages in other repositories and that will be true as long as there is any policy that might exclude any contribution to a centrally managed repository. The question is, why do we need/want different versions of the same-named packages, or packages that provide different versions of the same files that can overwrite each other based on conditions we can't control? There probably is a good reason to want this - I just can't think of it right now.

--
  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