On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Michael Stahnke
wrote:
> >
>
>
> Smooge thanks for the write-up.
>
> Great points are being brought up by all parties here.
>
> I think I'm +1 on a second repo that moves faster and can be incompatible
> with the right type of announce-list. (maybe even put the u
>
Smooge thanks for the write-up.
Great points are being brought up by all parties here.
I think I'm +1 on a second repo that moves faster and can be incompatible
with the right type of announce-list. (maybe even put the uri for that list
in the .repo file or something). It also might be accept
Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen said:
> On 13 August 2014 06:28, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > I disagree. FHS says that anything not part of the OS should go
> > in /opt/ EPEL is an add on and not part of the OS.
> >
> In the past we did not do this because we were bound by the Fedora
> Packa
On 08/13/2014 09:23 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:05:07 +0200
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>> At FLOCK this year, I did a short workshop on what was labeled
>> EPEL.Next. At that we went over a bit of what EPEL has done in the
>> past, what its current challenges are, and w
On 13 August 2014 06:28, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 01:25:04 +0200
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> > On 12 August 2014 21:56, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
> > > > * Example: When RHEL7.1 comes out we have a 30 day window to get
> > > > packages updated and new packages in that m
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:05:07 +0200
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> At FLOCK this year, I did a short workshop on what was labeled
> EPEL.Next. At that we went over a bit of what EPEL has done in the
> past, what its current challenges are, and what could be its future.
> Toshio Kuratomi was great i
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 01:25:04 +0200
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 12 August 2014 21:56, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:05:07 +0200
> > Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Where are we now:
> > > We support 3 arches.
> > I think you mean 3 releases. we have 3 arches
On 12 August 2014 18:52, Brian Stinson wrote:
>
> > I know that this proposal needs a lot more fleshing out, but I think it
> > covers the use cases many users of EPEL need for long term usage of
> > packages.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stephen J Smoogen.
>
> Were there plans made (at flock or elsewhere)
On Aug 13 01:25, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I think that would be something with softwarecollections.org as that seems
> in line with their way of packaging items. I think that for some sorts of
> packages and libraries it makes sense for that, but I don't know if EPEL
> would mix and match lik
On 12 August 2014 21:56, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:05:07 +0200
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>
> > Where are we now:
> > We support 3 arches.
> I think you mean 3 releases. we have 3 arches for epel5 and epel6 and 2
> for epel7
>
>
I actually meant arches as I forgot that
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:05:07 +0200
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> At FLOCK this year, I did a short workshop on what was labeled
> EPEL.Next. At that we went over a bit of what EPEL has done in the
> past, what its current challenges are, and what could be its future.
> Toshio Kuratomi was great i
At FLOCK this year, I did a short workshop on what was labeled EPEL.Next.
At that we went over a bit of what EPEL has done in the past, what its
current challenges are, and what could be its future. Toshio Kuratomi was
great in capturing what was said at the meeting and
EPEL
* Extra packages for
12 matches
Mail list logo
