On 05/12/2010 04:00 AM, BJ Dierkes wrote: > Granted, postgresql84 is likely a one-off for Redhat because they and Fedora > Infrastructure use PgSQL. However on this same note, the IUS Community > Project [1] has the same exact process for 'replacing' RHEL packages with > updated counterparts (i.e. php replaced by php52, php53, etc). Being the > primary maintainer of IUS, my question has to do with the fact that IUS > relies on EPEL and is meant to compliment both RHEL and EPEL with optional > upgrades for packages that are locked (incompatible upgrade paths) on a > branch and can't update. The last thing I want is to maintain a package in > IUS, that would be accepted and benefit EPEL. Seeing as RHEL allows the > practice of Conflict/Replace ... is this a policy that EPEL would also > embrace? Or is it something we want to strictly avoid as, with anything, it > has the potential to complicate things. >
IMO, I think it is time for EPEL to merge with IUS. We should strive to create parallel installable packages as much as possible but if there is a explicit package conflict and NOT a silent obsolete, then it should be allowed. I would avoid integrating apps that build on such conflict infrastructure packages however. Rahul _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
