EPEL acceptance policy

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 3/12/07, Tim Burke <tburke at redhat.com> wrote:
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> > Well the one problem I can see that is a bootstrap problem.. if RHEL
> > picks up some subset of EPEL packages for its own subchannel. However,
> > that is really nitpicking something to death.
> >
> >
> Good point.  In this case I think the package would naturally stop
> evolving in EPEL, as the incentive for inclusion would be removed.
> However, that transition (exit?) would be purely voluntary on the part
> of the EPEL pkg maintainer ... as RH isn't going to "force" it.
>
> Similarly, what to do if a package is included in RHEL5 but not in
> RHEL4. I would think its fair game for EPEL to build the RHEL4 version
> but not the RHEL5 version.
>

Working on qa'ing the Centos-4.92 build.. I ran into a similar issue.
Upgrading from 3.8 or 4.4 leaves around 148 'orphans' on a system. I
am expecting that some of those might be candidates for EPEL-5.x as
people like squirrelmail etc.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"