[CentOS] Re: Mixing RPMforge and EPEL (Was: EPEL repo)

Mon Jul 30 21:04:24 UTC 2007
Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net>

On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 03:57:23PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
> >>  I don't think this issue has any solution other than separate 
> >>namespaces.
> >
> >Looking at your requests on this you should realize that repotags are
> >what you are really asking for the minimum level, which is what epel
> >nuked to ashes. So the discussion should probably move away from this
> >list to the epel list. And since it's a dead topic there as well you
> >will not really get very far.
> I don't know enough about repotags to understand why everyone needs 
> them.  Can't any repotag be distinguished from no repotag?   Why is 
> there any need for cooperation beyond not choosing the same tag or lack 
> thereof?

All the repotags request was about is to idntify epel packages as such
with a simple tag in the file name, no more, no less. And that already
died with an awful sound.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20070730/c1c9ecc4/attachment-0005.sig>