Re: rpmfusion

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Justin Conover wrote:

> On 10/2/07, Brink Tastee <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 10/2/07, André Costa <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 10/2/07, Matthias Saou
> > > <thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Justin Conover wrote :
> > > >
> > > > > How is the rpmfusion repository coming along?
> > > >
> > > > Oooooh, right, I think it wasn't even announced here :-)
> > > >
> > > > http://rpmfusion.org/Announce
> > > >
> > > > Comments welcome, of course!
> > > >
> > > > It's coming along slowly, and I'm to blame a lot for that... but it
> > > > keeps moving forward, and we'll hopefully have something for end-users
> > >
> > > > when Fedora 8 is released ;-)
> > >
> > > Wow. This is _really_ cool, it's really nice to see you guys working
> > > together to merge repos, it really makes our lives easier. Thks again
> > > (and again, and again...) for putting so much effort on this =)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Andre
> > >
> >
> > Are any other repo sites planning on merging with rpmfusion? Dag? Dries?
> > Atrpms?...
>
> As of now, NO!  If you read through some of the list, seems a bit to much
> arguing from most of them.  Atrpms to me is really a fork of Fedora, Axel
> replaces many base packages which is a no no.  He makes some great packages
> but you just can't replace base packages as an addon repo.

Axel doesn't do that anymore since some time. Only if you enable the
testing or experimental stuff. Besides, there are plugins to avoid
upgrading base packages, which obviously makes less sense on Fedora.

But if you think this is important, you decide, not the repository. This
is critical to understand. If you require an update policy, the
user/client decides.

-- 
--   dag wieers,  [email protected],  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]