On 5 April 2016 at 16:34, Yasha Karant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 04/05/2016 09:37 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Dave Howorth <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 2016-04-05 16:40, Alan Bartlett wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5 April 2016 at 15:57, Yasha Karant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I know from past experience that ElRepo persons do read and reply to
>>>> this
>>>> list. Does any EPEL person? If not, does anyone know how to contact
>>>> the
>>>> EPEL maintainers?
>>>>
>>>> There is an issue with the EPEL MATE install method.
>>>>
>>>> Yasha Karant
>>>
>>>
>>> Let me correct your above two blunders:
>>>
>>> (1) The ELRepo Project is not EPEL.
>>> (2) I, my fellow founders and administrators of the ELRepo Project do
>>> read this mailing list and do respond, when appropriate.
>>
>>
>> I don't understand why you accuse Yasha of two blunders?
>>
>> His original post makes it clear that he understands the difference
>> between ElRepo and EPEL, so why do you think that is a blunder?
>>
>> He says that ElRepo DO read the list, which you then confirm, so why is
>> that a blunder?
>>
>> I think you owe him an apology, unless I have seriously misunderstood
>> something.
>
>
> OK ... I see that there was some misunderstanding ...
>
> Let's make peace here, shall we?
>
> Regarding contacting EPEL maintainers, I see the following description in
> EPEL's FAQ:
>
> "You can find help or discuss issues on the epel-devel mailing list or IRC
> channel #epel on Freenode. Report issues against EPEL via bugzilla"
> (
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#Where_can_I_find_help_or_report_issues.3F
> )
>
> Just checked the epel-devel mailing list. It does not seem to be actively
> used at this moment. So, I would suggest use of bugzilla.redhat.com is the
> way to go.
>
> Regarding ELRepo, while we (ELRepo team members) are reading this SL list,
> it is best to use ELRepo's mailing list to address any issue or ask
> questions ( http://lists.elrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/elrepo ) rather than
> here. In fact, I encourage everyone who uses ELRepo's packages to subscribe
> to the list.
>
> Akemi
>
> Although you are correct that you seriously did misunderstand what I posted,
> what you have posted confirms what I have observed after my posting on EPEL
> to the SL list: contacting anyone who knows EPEL and getting a meaningful
> response is about the same as I experienced with SuSE support (non-existent
> except for SLES and then only to "large" "corporate" customers). The
> comment I received from a person who gets the EPEL Red Hat Bugzilla
> "reports" was this:
>
> I don't have much to do with MATE directly (I'm mostly a package sponsor for
> some of the folks more directly involved).
>
> So, I'd recommend sticking relevant details in bugzilla
>
> End quote.
>
> Note that, unlike ELRepo folks with whom one can communicate via the SL list
> (persons who even are willing to identify themselves, and not "hide" behind
> some Bugzilla-like interface), EPEL seems much more unwilling to discuss
> matters. Has an EPEL "maintainer" ever (recently) posted/replied to the SL
> liist?
>
Hi. That would be me.
> I fully understand that the ELRepo folks are (presumably) volunteers, and
> thus may have little real free time to address such issues; hence, one
> should not pester them, particularly from typical enthusiast "users". I
> suspect that EPEL persons in part may, as with CentOS, now be paid by Red
> Hat, but I do not know this for a fact. I have had few issues with ELRepo
I am paid by Red Hat, but not to work on EPEL. That means I work on
EPEL after I have done my regular work. Think of it like reading
papers after your office hours. I do the EPEL work because it is
important to me and others, but if I have to do some other work
(office hours, teaching classes, doing particular research) that takes
precedence.
> packages, and those I or others have had
> seem to be well addressed (not always solved -- sometimes ithe solution is
> to wait for a later updated release) by the ELRepo correspondents to this SL
> llist.
>
> On this point, a question. I have been told (but not verified as a fact)
> that the Ubuntu equivalent to the main SL repository contains (all?)
> packages that one must, for any EL family distro, find on the master (SL,
> CentOS, etc.) repository and then hunt ELRepo, EPEL, and for some items, NUX
> and others (in which case I only enable software sources such as NUX during
> the actual installation of an RPM
> package that only is available in source or on such a repository). As I
> indicated in a previous post, I have no reason at the present time to switch
> to Ubuntu LTS (and definitely will not be going back to either
> OpenSUSE or SLES); however, I am curious if the above claim is factual.
> Such a "single" repository is much more convenient (and probably more
> consistent, without dependency conflicts) than rpmfind on the web, etc.
>
Possibly. And maybe Ubuntu will work better for you. A distribution is
like a sub-set of a field of education. You can probably do physics,
chemistry, math or psychology but you chose the field that you fit in
best. Some people work better on Ubuntu and some people work better on
SuSE and some people work better on Arch. And trying to force a person
to use a distro or toolset which their mind doesn't feel at home in is
like putting your shoes on the wrong feet. You can sometimes do it and
after a couple of hours it really hurts.
> Yasha Karant
>
> Yasha Karant
>
>
>
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
|
