RFC: Rethinking EPEL at FUDcon Lawrence 2013

[Kevin Fenzi]

A few more questions: 

- Who is going to write/maintain this plugin? :) 

- How do you plan on making sure everyone using EPEL is using the
  plugin? Have a Requires in epel-release? That strikes me as pretty
  ugly. 

- Who is going to update all the compose/build tools/scripts to handle
  this metadata. 

- How is the metadata added? By maintainer? What if they don't update
  it?

- What are the metadata keywords?

* Breakable = excluding this update because it needs intervention 
* Insecure = this package is no longer updated and insecure
?

- How do you handle trains of updates? 

foo-1.0-1 pushes out to stable
<time passes>
foo-2.0-1 pushes out, marked 'breakable' because you have to manually
update configs. 
<time passes>
foo-3.0-1 comes out, it's compatible with 2.0-1, no changes needed. 

Does someone still on 1.0-1 get upgraded to 3.0-1 since it's not
incompatible marked?

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20121206/edc7fff0/attachment.sig>