On Sunday 18 March 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
> I (and some other EPEL SIG members afaics) don't care much about using
> one or not. But afaics the use of a repotag is unwanted in Fedora-land
> up to now afaics.
>
> If the answer from the PC is "yes, EPEL is free to use a repotag" then
> please decide how to actually use it -- Add a "repotag" macro defined by
> the buildsys or overload %{dist}, ...
My .02€: as a user of an enterprise distro, using several repos which ship the
same software in slightly different packages is most definitely something I
wouldn't do (at least without actively taking care of overlaps myself eg.
with explicit per-repo exclusions/inclusions in depsolver configs, and
accepting the blame if it blows up on me). Repotag seems to encourage such
repo mixing somewhat, which is why I'm slightly leaning against it. Or put
another way, I really don't care because I think if I'm in a situation where
repotags between repos start to matter at all, I should sanity check my setup
before doing anything else.
But if there is a "repotag", it needs to be placed in the release tag in a way
that it doesn't affect version comparisons between package releases (within a
repo). Just defining %{dist} eg. as .elX.epel wouldn't work as %{dist} is
optional, but defining eg. %{repo} and making its usage rules the same
as %{dist}'s (except if dist is there too, repo needs to come directly
appended to it) could work.
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
