[ELGIS] Re: Enterprise Linux 6: what in EPEL? what in ELGIS?

Wed Aug 10 17:34:46 EDT 2011

From my experience it is not terribly exhausting. Once you are a packager, it 
should be enough to follow the announcement of guideline changes and whether a 
major change is going to take place, that will affect you.

You actually don't need to have a Fedora installation at all. You can 
exclusively be an EPEL maintainer, if you want. RHEL/CentOS/... should provide 
everything you need in that case. Using Mock and Koji, you can still use other 
build targets at least.

Volker

Am Mittwoch, 10. August 2011, 09:58:56 schrieb Peter Hopfgartner:
> On 08/07/2011 11:47 PM, Volker Fröhlich wrote:
> > Mathieu described the character of EPEL well. You can find in depth
> > information here:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Package_maintena
> > nce_and_update_policy
> > 
> > Sadly there are not a lot of active GIS packagers in Fedora. To package
> > for EPEL, you have to become a Fedora packager. EPEL is just another
> > build target, but with the policy constraints, as you can find above.
> > Fedora basically puts no limit on packaging new versions. This is, what
> > Mathieu refered to, saying "backporting".
> > 
> > If you are interested in new or up-to-date GIS packages in ELGIS, it
> > might be most effective to maintain it in Fedora. If you consider that
> > an option:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Ho
> > w_to_join_the_Fedora_Package_Collection_Maintainers.3F
> 
> This sounds reasonable. If it might be of any use, I would consider for
> myself to join in here. I still have to understand how much committment
> this requires. (Having Fedora installations for testing the packages,
> following on the ML, ....). I'll have a look to the mentioned links.
> 
> > Co-maintainers are welcome as well, of course! I'd also like to advertise
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/GIS again.
> > 
> > Reviews only take place for new packages or packages, that weren't
> > touched for a long time. The review doesn't necessarily take a long
> > time. I sometimes have reviews finished in a couple of hours. On the
> > other hand, if you don't find a reviewer or encounter severe problems,
> > it can take long.
> > 
> > One last note: Everything that goes to Fedora/EPEL must be free
> > (freedom). So no ECW or any other piece of software that restricts use
> > or anything.
> > 
> > Ad packes in EPEL 6: I'll try to introduce the putative QGIS 1.7 series
> > into EPEL6.
> > 
> > Ad intellectual property:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement
> > 
> > Volker
> > 
> > Am Samstag, 6. August 2011, 10:17:24 schrieb Mathieu Baudier:
> >> Hello,
> >> 
> >> I have synchronized locally the CentOS 6 and EPEL 6 repositories and I
> >> plan to start working on some EL6 packaging over the next few days.
> >> (For those like Micha and Peter we have already done some work on EL6,
> >> don't hesitate to send me your spec files!)
> >> 
> >> Now comes the question of which packages should be maintained in EPEL
> >> and which in ELGIS.
> >> 
> >> We already had some offlist discussions about it with Volker (who is
> >> doing an incredible job with Fedora packaging! Most of what we do is
> >> basically backporting his work).
> >> But this is now time to discuss it openly and decide together on our
> >> strategy.
> >> 
> >> There are two main benefits in maintaining packages in EPEL:
> >> 
> >> - this avoids the duplication of efforts and resources (esp. our time)
> >> 
> >> - since many have EPEL already configured this gives a wider access to
> >> FLOSS GIS software
> >> =>  people don't have to install an additional third-party repo that
> >> they have to trust
> >> 
> >> The drawbacks are around the policies and procedures of EPEL:
> >> 
> >> - one cannot update base packages
> >> =>  not a big deal in the short term for EL6 and anyhow we can always
> >> keep the ELGIS Plus repository
> >> 
> >> - one has to go through certain release procedure with review, etc.
> >> =>  probably good for the overall quality of such a huge repo, but may
> >> cost more time than it is worth for a small "niche" field like GIS
> >> 
> >> - the intellectual property allocation of the work done is not
> >> completely clear to me
> >> =>  personally, if I do volunteer work I prefer the created IP to be in
> >> the public domain or to belong to a non-profit like the OSGeo (that is
> >> the case for contributions to GeoTools for example). Not a big deal
> >> since we talk about FLOSS software, but still worth noting.
> >> 
> >> - apparently, once a version is introduced there should be only bug
> >> fixes, no upgrades
> >> =>  this is the reason there is currently a GDAL 1.7.x in EPEL.
> >> =>  @Volker: don't hesitate to elaborate a bit on this constraint if I
> >> misunderstood you
> >> 
> >> So far, we have tried to find a balance between the fast innovation in
> >> FLOSS GIS and he stability and predictability of the ELGIS repos.
> >> Our strategy is to perform significant package upgrades around the
> >> minor releases (5.5, 5.6, 6.0, 6.1, etc.) of Enterprise Linux, with
> >> bug fixes/enhances (micro versions) in between.
> >> 
> >> My personal taste would be to collaborate closely with Fedora and EPEL
> >> in order to basically use the same spec files (or at least have them
> >> very easy to merge) but keep our own pace for the most critical
> >> packages (GDAL and deps, PostGIS, MapServer, GRASS, QGIS, etc.).
> >> 
> >> Thanks in advance for your comments, opinions and ideas!
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> 
> >> Mathieu
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > el mailing list
> > el at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/el
> 
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> el mailing list
> el at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/el