On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 09:14:51AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:52:22 +0200 Alan Pevec apevec@gmail.com wrote:

...

Hi all,

this update shouldn't have been pushed b/c python-sphinx is in core RHEL: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2011-5268/python-sphinx-...

Yeah. ;(

Can you file a bug on it so the maintainer can end of life it?

...

Is there any check in place to prevent updates breaking the rule https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Policy_for_Conflic... ?

Nope. We have talked about setting something up, but it's not trivial to implement. ;( If you want to work on it, happy to help.

...

In the first place, I guess python-sphinx shouldn't have el6 branch at all.

Indeed. It should be dead.packaged.

dead.packaged and retired in the pkgdb

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:44:54 +0100 Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:

On 04/27/2012 04:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:

...

...

Is there any check in place to prevent updates breaking the rule https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Policy_for_Conflic... ?

Nope. We have talked about setting something up, but it's not trivial to implement. ;( If you want to work on it, happy to help.

Wonder what the challenges are... it should be mostly just a case of a white/black list matching on ${name}. We already do this against CentOS/EPEL for both src.rpm content and binary content in i386/x86_64 ( and hopefully powerpc soon )

It likely will be easier with 6. On 5 it was unclear what of the many channels to check against.

On 6 it's more clear what things we use and could check against.

If someone wants to write up such a script, or if CentOS folks are willing to provide their script I could see about getting it running here. ;)

kevin