RHN software channels & EPEL

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 02.08.2007 10:08, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
>> Just wondering: would it be fine for EPEL to ship for example
>> mysql-connector-odbc under a different name
>> ("mysql-connector-odbc-epel")? Then we would not replace packages from
>> layered products, just provide something (without support) that's also
>> provided by a layered product (which has support).
> That depends on how comfortable you are letting EPEL be a way to bypass 
> a product requirement essentially.

Complicated topic.

> If it is for libraries it might still be required and useful for other 
> reasons

Exactly. Not having some libs just because some layered product ships
them as well could be problematic for EPEL and hurt it a lot.

> but what about say fedora directory server in EPEL?

I'm unsure myself about this one. A *short* version and just a fragment
of the thoughts in my head: people pay Red Hat for the support, but some
people might just want the support for the OS, but not for a specific
software they install. Should we try to force those people into the
existing model (users nevertheless can just rebuild the Fedora-DS or
RHEL-DS SRPM) or do we simply offer what we have and let them chose if
they want payed support or not?

CU
knurd