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