meetings and some issues

[Kevin Fenzi]

Greetings. 

Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to
revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table
in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? 
Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time? 

Some issues that are pending that we can just discuss here: 

- Did we ever decide to make a epel-announce list? I think this might
  be good still to send important announcements about packages or other
  changes that end epel users should be notified of. I am not sure, but
  we could also send the package update announcements there (might be
  too much traffic tho, perhaps just the stable ones?)

- Orphans. We have the following orphan packages. Some of them are more
  'retired', but we should look at trying to find owners for the ones
  that can still be maintained. 

abcde
aget
cd-discid
csync2
cvs2cl
cvsps
freetennis
gkrellm
gkrellm-volume
gtkhtml38
libid3tag
libmodplug
mach
otrs
pytz
redet
redet-doc
svn2cl

- Bugs. We are now just over 100 epel bugs. This is no good, IMHO. 
Would it be possible to get some interested folks to dig through these
and see about fixing easy ones/poking maintainers/doing something to
move them along. Especially in the case where it's a missing dep. 

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Fedora
EPEL&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=POST&bug_status=FAILS_QA

- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the
  things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than that?

- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the
  recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a
  higher evr. ;( 

- How can we get more packages branched for EPEL? Perhaps we could
  approach some of the sigs, like the perl-sig and ask them to consider
  their packages that work/make sense on EPEL (I have seen a bunch of
  new perl packages in fedora that were not branched for EPEL). 

I'm sure there are other things, but those are the ones I can think of
off the top of my head. ;) 

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/20090209/36d52cc9/attachment.sig>