Axel Thimm wrote: > On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 06:52:09AM -0400, R P Herrold wrote: >> Here as well, we differ -- CentOS at its core is about boring, and >> stable and conservative as a core value. You are in the wrong place >> if you think otherwise. It makes a fine BASE to build on, as Dag's >> archive has long demonstrated, but there is NOT a good fit for a >> beginner to start doing invasive changes to get 'the latest and >> greatest' to compile. That is the 'rap' as to Axel's archive, and >> why people end up frustrated using it and moan and groan about their >> ignorance and NOT READING our clear warnings on the wiki's >> Repositories page > > I'm not sure I understand correctly, does that mean that you imply > ATrpms is doing invasive changes to CentOS/RHEL and people using it > end up frustrated while ATrpms is showing ignorance towards them? I don't want to speak for Russ here, but what I think he means is that ATrpms allows things to be added to CentOS/RHEL that require a lot more attention because of the parts the core OS some things replace, especially things outside the Stable branch. Personally, I don't think this is unexpected, as ATrpms also adds lots of functionality ... much like our CentOS Plus repos. So there is much flexibility (a good thing), but also the possibility to break your install if you don't know what you are doing. Of course, this is also very true of the CentOS Plus repo too ... if you add everything willie nillie, then it can also cause issues. Certainly I think ATrpms is a great resource and I use it where I need it. I would recommend caution where things outside the Stable branch are used (just like I recommend for CentOS Plus or the CentOS Testing repos).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
