[CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
linuxhousedn at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 30 04:06:18 UTC 2009
same here. i really must thank dag wiers and gang for all the good work. But If epel and rpmforge can work together , that's great.
----- Original Message ----
> From: Ron Loftin <reloftin at twcny.rr.com>
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 3:13:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
> While I don't want to just add noise to this thread, I think that there
> might be some miscommunication and/or misunderstanding involved here. I
> also want to express my appreciation to Dag and the folks who maintain
> the RPMforge repo, as I find it quite useful.
> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 20:34 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
> > >
> > >> A quick look at http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=centos
> > >> shows that a great majority of the packages are not even
> > >> close to being "up-to-date", and that is a good thing for
> > >> those us of who care more about stability than eyecandy.
> > >
> > > That can't be other way. For instance, you can't build GIMP 2.4 or 2.6
> > > unless you you upgrade to a newer GTK+, which would impact on a lot of
> > > apps.
> > >
> The impression I get from the above exchange is that someone either has
> not read the CentOS mission statement, or does not understand it in the
> context of "enterprise" and "stable" distribution. This leads to
> dissatisfaction with their installations, since one of the costs of
> long-term stability is loss of the capability to upgrade package
> versions in a piecemeal manner.
> > > OTOH, Dag is in a funny position: he's the main maintainer of RPMforge,
> > > which has 2 main issues:
> > > (1) It's broken, at least partially. Try install audacious for one.
> > > (2) It's incompatible with EPEL. Try install MPlayer and VLC with EPEL
> > > enabled.
> These observations, while technically correct, show a lack of
> familiarity with the long-running differences of opinion between the
> RPMforge folks and the EPEL crew. Again, in the technical/factual
> universe, I support Dag's response below, but in the political/emotional
> world, I hope that this is not indicating a bump up against the limits
> of his patience with these conflicting viewpoints.
> > (1) I expect now patches from you to make a workable audacious based on
> > our audacious package. Apparently you have the interest and the time
> > to do it ?
> > (2) No, they are not compatible, we know. Share to help with this too ?
> > You first have to convince the Fedora people that they will not
> > introduce new incompatibilities before starting. I'd right merge, but
> > also that is not happening as there is no interest. So what is the
> > solution ? Shall I simply stop doing RPMforge ?
> Here I will speak for myself, while hoping that there are others who
> will agree:
> HELL NO !!!
> I'm not enough of a programmer to even THINK of replacing the talent you
> bring to the table, and I suspect that there are relatively few people
> who DO posses those skills who would also have the dedication you do. I
> will say it if nobody else will: The distros supported by RPMforge
> would be poorer without your efforts.
> > Is that the position you prefer to force me into ? Because I certainly did
> > not force you into using the repository.
> On the lighter side: If you HAD forced anyone to use the repository, I
> suspect that you would have forced them to read the relevant docs
> ( HOWTOs, etc. ) FIRST. ;>
> > I don't know even why you want to use RPMforge, there must be something
> > that is missing from EPEL ?
> > I am happy to learn what you want to do though, because it is easy to
> > criticize, but it takes time to do some work.
> > (And I hope the solution is not another repository, because we have been
> > there :-))
> Ron Loftin reloftin at twcny.rr.com
> "God, root, what is difference ?" Piter from UserFriendly
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
More information about the CentOS