Dag Wieers wrote: >> Well, yeah, that might be a good idea. But note that we try to get >> z00dax from http://centos.karan.org/ involved. He AFAIK is in contact >> with dag and dries. > > I'm wondering if the wrong community is involved. To me it makes much more > sense if CentOS would be involved and leading the RHEL packaging efforts. > Fedora and CentOS users are a different kind (even though some live in > both worlds, most do not). ... > I think the CentOS people have a much better understanding of what is > required and what balance needs to be struck. That's all well and good, probably so. Consider who already has the infrastructure (in place already) for community involvement (cvs, plague/mock builders, mirrors, etc...). Fedora (Extras) has that, does CentOS as well? >> They of course are always invited to join us and I'd try my best to give >> them everything we can to make it interesting for them to join us. But I >> suppose that's not enough. > > It's impossible to match both worlds I guess. If you go back to the > initial discussions about Fedora, they flat out refused to think about > RHEL. Now it's too late, or you have to leave behind RHEL2.1 or RHEL3 (or > start all over for these). RPM lacks infrastructure, Red Hat should have > backported RPM infrastructure from the very start. Hey, we gotta start somewhere, and that somewhere is rhel4 (and soon rhel5). If there's interest in rhel3 (or agast rhel2.1), there's no reason these initial efforts cannot be expanded to include them as well. -- Rex -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
