Unstable EPEL? (frequent package updates)

[Michael A. Peters]

Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> Michael A. Peters wrote:
>> There are a few exceptions. I do think RHEL is justified in moving 
>> Firefox to FF3. The reason is twofold -
>>
>> 1) Firefox has a huge codebase. It would take extreme amount of man 
>> power to continue to maintain FF 1.x without upstream.
>>
>> 2) The web evolves quickly, and a browser must keep in touch with 
>> modern web innovations, particularly in the area of javascript and CSS 
>> implementation.
>>
> 
> A small addition here; RHEL does so by releasing a minor update to the 
> entire operating system (5.2) - so everyone knows to look for changes 
> like these. Is this something EPEL can do as well?
> 
> EPEL 5.1/nethack-3.4.3
> 
> EPEL 5.2/nethack-4.0 (for the right reasons)
> 
> Just a thought.

To be honest, I think it would be too much effort to keep separate 
branches of EPEL for each point release just for the few cases where 
there is a legitimate reason to update a package.

If a user doesn't want to upgrade to a point release, the user can add 
nethack to their excludes for automatic updates.