Hi Sergio and Dag, > > So anything build against RHEL6's gnome 2.32 may fail with a Gnome 2.32 > > backport and our aim is to break the least. But while I am personally not > > in favor of adding this to RPMforge I would like to have such a > > discussion because I think its merit is defining the rules or finding > > alternatives. >
> But what about having RPMForge-Gnome and RPMForge-KDE (or > RPMForge-Desktop) with non server-centric desktop packages? I think separating this from the main rpmforge repo is a good idea. But the question I see is which repos to create. I fear that we create a separate repo for each group of applications (like rpmforge-gnome and rpmforge-kde) we will end up with lots of different repos. This will lead to confusion, incompatibility and lots of work to keep it maintained. Wouldn't it make more sense to have one seprate repo for all these non-leaf updates? We could call it rpmforge-nonleaf, -replace, -extra-extras or the like. I think such a repo makes sense for more than just gnome or kde. I have e.g. updated php for my centos 5 servers because we needed some features and fixes only available in the current versions. I kept them in my local repo but having such a repo in rpmforge would make it easy to publish it. Kind regards, Gerd -- Address (better: trap) for people I really don't want to get mail from: jo...@cactusamerica.com _______________________________________________ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
