[CentOS] Re: Mixing RPMforge and EPEL (Was: EPEL repo)
"Petr \"Qaxi\" Klíma"
qaxi at seznam.cz
Thu Aug 2 05:37:57 UTC 2007
Les Mikesell napsal(a):
>>
>> Correct, you would think Fedora took care of this, right ? But there
>> is no interest for Fedora to take care of that because they want to
>> be the only repository. It is not something they have an incentive
>> for to fix.
>>
>> That is exactly the problem. The repotag would be a workaround (and a
>> convenient one for users) but the real changes need to be in yum or
>> somewhere else. And Fedora does not care, so RHEL will not have it.
>>
>> I have warned for this on the Feodra mailinglist years ago. There
>> just is no interest to have the diversity of more than one repository.
>
> What value does diversity add when the end user can't select which one
> he wants or load all of them? I understand the scenario where a
> single repository has a policy that prohibits certain packages from
> being included, but the only conflicts in those cases should be where
> an incomplete version is packaged in one place under the same name as
> the full version in a place with a different policy. The more common
> case would just be additional packages or packages with different names.
>
> From an end-user viewpoint, I can't see why anyone would want to
> maintain a potentially-conflicting package of something that can be
> freely distributed and keep it in an isolated repository, especially
> without any mechanism to control which will be installed. Can you
> explain the reason anyone would want to have diversity instead of a
> single maintainer per package and the same packages in all
> repositories whose policies find them acceptable?
>
Diversity adds a lot of value. If EPEL will be only repo nobody on RHEL
workstation can see/listen MP3, WMA, DVD playing, because of interesting
US software patent and millenium act law.
--
Petr Klíma
e-mail: qaxi at seznam.cz
More information about the CentOS
mailing list