Unless I've missed something (which is possible) there hasn't been any "public
progress announcements" regarding rpmfusion in the past several weeks.

Is there anything new to report? My ulterior motive is that I would love to
have the convenience of a one-stop rpm shop for Centos/RHEL and Fedora, and
it's my understanding that's what rpmfusion is intended to be...

--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 00:52 -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
> Unless I've missed something (which is possible) there hasn't been any "public
> progress announcements" regarding rpmfusion in the past several weeks.
>
> Is there anything new to report? My ulterior motive is that I would love to
> have the convenience of a one-stop rpm shop for Centos/RHEL and Fedora, and
> it's my understanding that's what rpmfusion is intended to be...

RPMFusion has their own mailing lists; consider asking there.

(Spoiler: Too much work, not enough people)

--
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@gmail.com>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 03:40:08 -0400
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@gmail.com> wrote:

> RPMFusion has their own mailing lists; consider asking there.

I did exactly that, before posting my question here. Didn't see anything that
looked like a recent overall progress update. The last post to the users list
was almost a month back and the developers list is mostly concerned with
individual packages and and not an overview. Dribble is apparently fully
present and accounted for, but what of the other repositories?

--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Frank Cox wrote:

Unless I've missed something (which is possible) there hasn't been any "public
progress announcements" regarding rpmfusion in the past several weeks.

Is there anything new to report? My ulterior motive is that I would love to
have the convenience of a one-stop rpm shop for Centos/RHEL and Fedora, and
it's my understanding that's what rpmfusion is intended to be...



rpmfusion never intended to support CentOS or any EL distro, they are
very much Fedora centric, so you should go talk to them about it


--
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Frank Cox wrote:

> Unless I've missed something (which is possible) there hasn't been any "public
> progress announcements" regarding rpmfusion in the past several weeks.
>
> Is there anything new to report? My ulterior motive is that I would love to
> have the convenience of a one-stop rpm shop for Centos/RHEL and Fedora, and
> it's my understanding that's what rpmfusion is intended to be...

Not to start a repo flame war, but for CentOS/RHEL, the repo that aims to
be a one-stop rpm shop is EPEL. Of course it needs more contributors, but
it has already ported a significant amount of FC6's old 'extras' repo
over (FC6 <-> EL5).

I suspect that EL6 will be equivalent to F8 as F9 has just way too many
new technologies that will take 2 years or more to settle down to stable
technologies.


-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:

Not to start a repo flame war, but for CentOS/RHEL, the repo that aims to
be a one-stop rpm shop is EPEL. Of course it needs more contributors, but
it has already ported a significant amount of FC6's old 'extras' repo
over (FC6 <-> EL5).


Ross, you are wrong on that front - EPEL cant by definition be the one
stop shop as a repo. Thats the sort of thing that some of us are trying
to address with rpmforge, atrpms along with CentOS and SciLinux
developers contributing into the rpmrepo.org project. Once its off the
ground and functioning perhaps EPEL will like to join in, but thats
their decision.



--
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:

> Not to start a repo flame war,

nice try.

-- Rex

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Rex Dieter wrote:
> Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
>
> > Not to start a repo flame war,
>
> nice try.

Nice catch =

scnr,

Ralph
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Karanbir Singh wrote:

> Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> > Not to start a repo flame war, but for CentOS/RHEL, the repo that aims to
> > be a one-stop rpm shop is EPEL. Of course it needs more contributors, but
> > it has already ported a significant amount of FC6's old 'extras' repo
> > over (FC6 <-> EL5).
>
> Ross, you are wrong on that front - EPEL cant by definition be the one
> stop shop as a repo. Thats the sort of thing that some of us are trying
> to address with rpmforge, atrpms along with CentOS and SciLinux
> developers contributing into the rpmrepo.org project. Once its off the
> ground and functioning perhaps EPEL will like to join in, but thats
> their decision.

If they manage to port all the Fedora extras over for EL then I
would say that is pretty darn close to one-stop shop for RPMs. Of
course no repo can have it all. There are always the questionable
items like closed source drivers and codecs which should be isolated.

Now I am not even going to touch the political/moral issue of whether
they SHOULD be a one-stop shop, I merely stated what they aim to be.

CentOS could develop it's own EPEL-like repo for it's 'extras' if
enough developers are willing to put in the time to develop and
maintain such a beast. There could be one for each release and
use the corresponding Fedora 'extras' repo as the base to build
off of.

Personally if my opinion matters for anything, which it most
probably doesn't, I have always felt that enterprise Linux repos
would be best served if they were maintained expressly for the
enterprise Linux they serve. That way compatibility and quality
assurance would be at the same level as the Linux they run on
and they can react faster to changes within the enterprise
Linux environment.

The bottom line in this whole discussion though is we all hate
repo overlap and I think if given the chance to pick one repo
that had almost all we were looking for we would pick that
one. I believe it is in that regard that Debian has it's
strength.

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Ralph Angenendt wrote:

> Rex Dieter wrote:
> > Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> >
> > > Not to start a repo flame war,
> >
> > nice try.
>
> Nice catch =

I had to preface it with that, so I wouldn't seem like a total troll!

Now if you excuse me, since my work is done here, I have a bridge to crawl under...

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos