On 18.12.2008 16:55, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2008/12/18 Gianluca Sforna <giallu(a)gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2008/12/18 Gianluca Sforna <giallu(a)gmail.com>:
>>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com>
>>>> 2008/12/18 Till Maas <opensource(a)till.name>:
>>>>> Why do you want to use a different naming scheme than all the other
>>>>> config files, which use this scheme:
>>>> because the namespace is already taken.
>>> Assuming <name> would be "rpmfusion_free" who took it?
>> What would be the namespace of the epel cfg files for rpmfusion then ?
> Very right. what about:
That 's a matter of choice. [...]
RPM Fusion supports EL & EPEL, but I wouldn't call those repos "RPM
Fusion Free EPEL", because that would lead to confusion with the
original EPEL. I don't think we or the original EPEL wants that. So we
should use the term EPEL only when it comes to the topic for what our
packages are build (e.g. EL & EPEL)