Need to move Monday meeting

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:42:22 +0200
fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:

> On 13.09.2008 17:57, Jon Stanley wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis
> > <fedora at leemhuis.info> wrote:
> > 
> >> I'd much prefer to ship the newer libs or those 'core' apps in
> >> question in parallel to the packages from EL. That was discussed
> >> for speex (a newer one than the one in EL5 is needed by recent
> >> asterisk versions iirc) and might solve the problems.
> > Me too, except I foresee one problem with this.  Joe User enables
> > the EPEL repo, and is ignorant of the fact that it now includes
> > updates to packages included in base RHEL. [...]
> 
> No, that's not what I meant ;-)
> 
> Sorry, should have been more clear in my mail. With "in parallel to
> the packages from EL" I meant: EL continues to ship for example speex
> as speex-1.0.5-4.el5_1.1, and we ship speex 1.2 as "speex12-1.2-4" or 
> something with its contents in a special path. Of cause all apps in
> EPEL that need that speex then need special treatment to look in that
> special path for speex.

Yeah, although even that can be difficult if there are things that are
not parallel installable easily, and filtering deps could be tricky
there as well in case the two packages provide some of the same
things. ;( 

I'm in general against doing any layered products or the like... I
don't think we have enough interested people to manage such a thing and
I think it would cause a lot more complexity and confusion. ;( 
I'm happy to be convinced otherwise though. ;) 

> Cu
> knurd

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20080913/b8e26735/attachment.sig>