On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 19:27, Jon Peatfield
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Nov 2010, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> As was stated before, for Scientific Linux 6, if a package is in EPEL, we
>> would like to keep it in EPEL.
>> But there are some packages that we feel should go into Scientific Linux.
>> This usually because they are needed during the installation process, or for
>> some other reason.
>> I am trying to gather the list of packages we will need to add.
>> Here is what I currently have.
>>
>> - packages changed/added for trademark reasons and/or branding.
>> - SL tweaks packages
>> - openafs (it isn't in EPEL)
>> - icewm (it isn't in EPEL and it would be good during the install)
>> - revisor (will be used for building distributions and sites)
>> - firmware - specifically network based firmware
>>
>> Here is what is in epel thus far.
>> http://mirror.anl.gov/fedora/epel/beta/6/
>
> How about:
>
>  ScientificPython
>  djvulibre
>  freefem++
>  gnumeric (maybe)
>  mail-notification
>  octave
>  openreduce
>  pdflib-lite
>  pdftk
>  pybliographer
>  python-bibtex
>  tomboy

Many of these could be brought into epel if requested as they have
upstream Fedora components. Some like tomboy bring in a lot of other
stuff (I switched to gnote for that reason, but it is a personal taste
on my part).

> not all of these are specifically 'scientific' though.
>
> I note that some of the versions of packages in the sl6 test tree are older
> than things we ended up needing to upgrade in sl5, e.g. I have a set of 2009
> tidy packages to match some other bits we build.  I'm slightly surprised
> that the 2007 version was current when el6 was frozen...
>
> If packages are in the base or EPEL is requesting a more current version in
> EPEL likely to be successful?
>
> If packages are in EPEL who looks after things like security updates for
> them?

The EPEL maintainer is meant to look after security updates. If they
aren't doing so it needs to be brought up to fix. [EG if you find out
that something didn't get fixed security wise please let me or other
EPEL people know.]

> If packages arn't currently in EPEL does anyone know how much effort it is
> to add them (assuming I an happy to volunteer to maintain the packaging for
> the ones I will need to build anyway)?

First would be to join the epel mailing list
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list and posting
your needs. After that you can see about joining Fedora and help out
on packages.

> Sorry if I'm asking stupid questions, I've previously mostly avoided EPEL
> because of a bad experience a very long time ago (which might not even have
> been EPEL, I might have mixed it up with a different repo).

I won't say we haven't had problems. EPEL has had its ups and downs
with various different viewpoints pulling in different directions.


>  -- Jon
>



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren