Re: Request Tracker's Massive Dependencies -- RPM-ified?

On 9/12/05, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

> A lot of people have rpm-ified RT at one time or another (me among
> others). The problem is not doing it but doing it cleanly and
> maintaining/updating the huge pile of resulting packages afterwards.
> Usually people do the initial packaging, and by the time they're finished
> they're so fed up with RT they don't take the time to clean up their
> packages or update them afterwards.

The landscape certainly seems to be littered with the ruins of
one-time efforts.  I don't see a lot of value in creating yet another
one versus just setting up RT in place (as I've already done).
 
> Therefore, I seriously advice against doing it alone outside a project
> where you'll be able to spread the load. The most cost-effective approach
> right now would be to join the FE effort, help hasten the
> packaging/review/test process for FE devel, and then port/adapt the result
> to whatever RHEL/Centos/FC version you intend to use.

If nothing else, this is probably a good way to learn first-hand the
pitfalls associated with dependencies/upgrades of a complex RPM
project.  I'll swing by and check it out.

If/when I ever get it set up to run properly on non-Fedora systems,
perhaps then I'll hassle Dries to include it in RPMforge.

  -- Steve