On Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:25:10 -0500 Greg Swift <gregsw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If an additional repo is decided to be the way to go, what would it > take to develop a mostly 'complete' list along with a list of existing > howtos or subject matter experts that can be referenced by the poor > soul(s) who volunteer to do the work? Hard to say until we had such a list. ;) > > And I'm sure there's other issues... it would not be at all easy, > > and I would prefer to avoid it. > > understandably. although at this point I'm wondering a few things: > > 1: since multiple bits have brought this up and no one has come up > with a better solution, is this the way we need to go? I'm still not sure. ;) > 2: would a single EPEL-supplemental/rolling/fubar meet the needs of > both of these paths? I don't know. I'd love to hear from those that have cases not handled by current EPEL. > 3: is it possible to do the numbered packages in the same git > repositories without creating a whole separate package path? is it > reasonable? I don't know. I guess it would need to be 'epel6-rolling' and 'epel5-rolling' as seperate branches in git. kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
