On 07/22/2013 03:38 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 03:13:28PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 07/22/2013 02:52 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 02:28:52PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
What better time to move epel out of Fedora since is really not
related to Fedora et all but is strictly for downstream distribution
based upon us to use ( like RHEL and it's clones )
I'm not sure what you think needs to be "moved out of Fedora". Governance
of EPEL is separate. Packagers are allowed to be independent. in your
previous post you mention the word "infrastructure". If you're just talking
about the fact that epel shares the same koji, bodhi, git, etc with Fedora,
I'm not sure what harm those do to us right now and I can see a large amount
of benefit in terms of the manpower required to maintain those systems.
For Epel yes, for RHEL yes for Fedora no
For Fedora, yes as well. The Fedora Infrastructure team uses EPEL for their
boxes so they'd likely still be the ones who maintained a separate system.
If a separate system took more of their time then that would cut into their
time spent working on Fedora itself.
Our Fedora infrastructure team should be using Fedora it's an disgrace
to the community for them not doing so.
Could you please go into what is troubling you more?
Reluctant changes and cleanups to components and their spec files and
our packing guidelines due to them being maintained in Epel and RHEL.
Cleanups and changes sounds like a social problem rather than a technical
one. I think you'll have this issue as long as the same maintainer is
concerned with both Fedora and EPEL/RHEL. I mean you mention RHEL and RHEL
already lives in a separate system so it doesn't seem to have helped.
The ability to maintain and share the same spec file is the technical
problem and ads unnecessary complexity to them which in turns makes them
more proportioner and harder to keep up 2 date to our guidelines.
Packaging Guidelines themselves are written for Fedora. We note where
EPEL/RHEL need something different where applicable.
Aha that's why nonsenses like the allowance for legacy sysv init file to
be continued to be shipped once they have been migrated because it was
being beneficial to Fedora in anyway lol
No that decition was not made strictly for Fedora in mind since it's
absurd as as it can get...
Just keep that documentation out of our wiki ( or in epel's own under
epels own domain or lock tide within red hat docs ) since that has
nothing to do with Fedora and having it there only confuses Fedora packagers
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
