support, especially when much of the work is already handled via
Fedora's git infra.
Is this proposal acceptable to the EPEL devs and contributors?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel
we
end up.
What are the needs and wants for both packagers and users?
What are the lessons to learn from EPEL when creating EPIC?
Does one repository solve this, or would this need to be a project
structure with multiple repositories underneath?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http
With cinnamon and mate being added for epel7, how would one go about
requesting that groups be created for them, similar to the xfce group?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel
some prep-work
to not overwrite core packages.
Thoughts as to how this might be accomplished?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing
to be the
base repo would be for something RHEL doesn't ship, such as x86 or other
arch.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
we're the only ones doing 32bit that I'm aware of, it has less
user impact. Lets get EPEL7 proper out the door first and then openly
discuss adding the x86 secondary arch.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
.x86_64 from epel excluded (priority)
-- perl-Syntax-Highlight-Engine-Kate-0.04-5.1.el6.noarch from epel
excluded (priority)
-- perl-UNIVERSAL-isa-1.03-1.el6.noarch from epel excluded (priority)
-- perl-B-Keywords-1.09-3.1.el6.noarch from epel excluded (priority)
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project
roadmap.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
things off-list that may be worth discussing.
If this is to be a regular meeting time, I'll certainly be able to
attend the next.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing
be these
days.]
I am adding their contact email in CC
Rahul
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http
into the epel package so that there's only
one shipped.
Alternatively, is cloud-init an actual shipped RH package that should be
excluded/blacklisted from epel?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
be required
from an EPEL perspective to make this happen?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
On 09/25/2014 10:28 AM, Steve Traylen wrote:
Excerpts from Antonio Trande's message of 2014-09-25 17:15:45 +0200:
Hi Jim.
On 09/25/2014 04:36 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
Earlier this week on the CentOS devel list I proposed an interim method
to help make it easier for centos contributions
On 09/25/2014 12:22 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 09:36:07AM -0500, Jim Perrin wrote:
Members of this group would be responsible for shepherding packages
designated by the various SIG efforts in CentOS through the process of
getting these packages in epel. This means
On 09/25/2014 12:27 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:47:43AM -0500, Jim Perrin wrote:
This would be my take also, getting pkgs into EPEL is a pretty well
defined process as is a becoming a packager. I don't see an extra
step/group
is needed within CentOS is needed
/fdbbe746b0838a8957c8dbd1971d1a29a29532a7/SOURCES!cloud-init-centos-opennebula-requiretty.patch
https://git.centos.org/blob/rpms!cloud-init.git/fdbbe746b0838a8957c8dbd1971d1a29a29532a7/SOURCES!cloud-init-centos-cloudstack-urlhandling.patch
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http
.
Is there something that would cause them to not show up in appdb as
being part of epel7?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 11/03/2014 04:37 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote:
Are there 32 bit libraries somewhere out these for this version
of Wine?
Currently no, not for EL7.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
will be about:
Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/2542/
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http
edora sources provide a sane split for this, while the EL sources do
not. This occasionally means creating a new package just for EPEL rather
than simply branching the fedora tree.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD7
omething in fedora
magazine about this that we could redistribute or link-to for CentOS as
well. This change seems like it deserves making some community noise
beyond some threads on the mailing list.
Thoughts?
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity |
> maintainer (aka Kaleb) and the users lifes miserable.
>
> Does the above sound reasonable ?
>
I think that's the best course of action.
+1 here.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
__
lar to package
>inclusion. EPIC-next modules must not replace/conflict with CentOS
>modules. They may use their own namespace to offer newer versions
>than what is offered and those modules may be removed in the next
>minor release if CentOS offers them then.
>
L leadership to make sure this is
taken into account for the planning process. I make no promises, but I
am making it known.
--
Jim Perrin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
___
epel-devel m
27 matches
Mail list logo
