[CentOS-devel] [Proposal] Converge EPEL and CBS

[Dave Johansen]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Haïkel <hguemar at fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Since the CentOS acquihire, there was a lot of discussion about EPEL's
> future.
> Since the FOSDEM meetup between Fedora/CentOS folks, there was little
> progress on that topic
>
> After a discussion with a Smooge, I decided to come with a proposal,
> knowing that
> 1. Fedora wants to keep EPEL within it umbrella
> 2. That CentOS SIGs are in practice rebuilding a lot of EPEL packages
> (or retag them for other SIGs)
> leading to poor maintenance as they don't follow EPEL tickets for all
> their dependencies.
> 3. EPEL is not part CentOS plans, and as soon as SIGs will progress,
> *may* turn the former irrelevant
> 4. Some EPEL packages are poorly maintained especially on older EL
> releases and/or orphaned
>
>
> We've reached the point where both EPEL/CBS would greatly benefit to join
> hands.
>
> So I suggest that we consider the following:
> * EPEL will still use Fedora dist-git
> * EPEL builds should be done in CBS to make it easier for SIGs to consume
> it.
> * EPEL will use CentOS repositories instead of mirroring RHEL repositories
> * Bridging Fedora/CentOS accounting system (CentOS is migrating to
> FAS)  <== we need to see the feasibility of this but that would be
> optimal, that would increase the permeability between our two
> contributors pools which is something, we all want to encourage.
> * Create a EPEL provenpackager group under CentOS core SIG
> supervision, allowing them to appoint people to maintain EPEL
> packages.
>
> I suggest that we keep the EPEL name to acknowledge EPEL historical
> effort to provide quality additional packages for EL distros.
> Fedora contributors would still be able to contribute to EPEL, and
> CentOS contributors to make it up their standards.
>
> Would that work for you?
>

I'm a maintainer of several EPEL packages and a CentOS user. After reading
through this, I don't understand the value in this shift. Also, what are
the potential negatives of the change?
Thanks,
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150921/a0e5e148/attachment.html>