[Spacewalk-devel] Re: Supporting other repositories.

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us> wrote:
> On Friday 07 November 2008 12:10:08 pm Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> Ok loaded term but I was wondering if we could work with spacewalk,
>> ipa, ds, etc to support their work by including at least a
>> spacewalk-release or similar item. This would allow us to 'test' the
>> waters of working closer with the other layered upstreams. Basically
>> instead of having to hunt around for every different repository, we
>> work with the upstream project ot have a signed release that works
>> with the EPEL releases.
>>
>> Anyway.. back to dealing with local stuff.. I figured I should fire it
>> off before I forget.
> Other than completely violating fedora's guidelines that EPEL is subject to.
> I don't think its a good idea. It makes it too easy to not do the work needed
> to get things into fedora/EPEL
>

The issue I am trying to deal with is several issues

1) we have RH-upstream-product-0.X needing something that RHEL-4/5 do
not ship in apache etc Its going to happen because thats just how
software projects go.
2) we have stuff in EPEL that would replace a layered product. I mean
if we put spacewalk in and it replaces something from
RHN-supported-product. I really am not worried about sales.. someone's
going to make rebuilds available somewhere but I am trying to work out
a way that someone is not going to clobber themselves by having a RH
product and enabling EPEL on the box.
3) product timeline does not match up with EPEL timeline. This happens
a lot with the cobbler/koan/func stuff where they are implementing
fixes but I could see it happening in say IPA etc. where they have a
midmonth release or 'just-a-bugfix' upgrade.



> fedora-ds is in fedora I suggest that you ask richm to build fedora-ds into
> EPEL. freeipa is in fedora also.  we should talk with rcrit to get freeipa
> branched and built for EPEL  it will require fedora-ds to be there first.
>
> we should get what we can of spacewalk in  except for the bits needing oracle
> since they dont meet the guidelines yet.   Spacewalk has said from the start
> that it will work to get in EPEL.  as to other layered products we have always
> said that it will be up to the individual team  if they wish to have their
> product in EPEL.
>

In no way am I saying to bring in/enable a product that doesn't want
to be there.. I am sorry my writing led you to believe that.

> I personally feel that having the product in EPEL will help not hinder sales.
> those people who wont pay for support will still not pay for support.  those
> on the fence may deploy the product because of the easier route to
> installation and decide that once installed and in production they need
> support.  Those customers who are willing to pay and want support will
> continue to do so.
>
> Dennis
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spacewalk-devel mailing list
> Spacewalk-devel at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
>



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