[users] Manifest out of date?

[Bogdan Costescu]

On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Hugo van der Kooij wrote:

> Even the way to add it to your own system is hidden deep inside the 
> menu tree.
> ...
> And I am not very encouraged by a binary package for FC4 as the way to
> add the repository.

I very much agree with this. I usually just copied the definitions 
from an older yum config, but I tried recently to set it up for a 
friend without access to any yum config and found out that the 
information about the repository is not easy to get. And rather than
unpacking RPM packages (binary/noarch or source), I ended up searching 
for mirrors and then playing with paths until it worked. I really 
don't understand why a URI could not be posted somewhere on the main 
page or why binary/noarch config RPMs could not be created for the 
past ~3 years while the actual (and very useful) packages were.

> Frankly I would look for something else if I was looking for 
> something for Centos 5 of Fedora 8.

Indeed, I think that it's only those who know how good this repo is 
who are interested to keep using it.

> But it would be nice if someone can do an overhaul of the webpages 
> and perhaps a better package to add the repository.

Some repo consolidation is supposed to happen and maybe people prefer 
to put the effort into the new structure and webpages. Either way, I 
very much support the idea of having easy-to-get instructions and 
updated RPMs.

-- 
Bogdan Costescu

IWR - Interdisziplinaeres Zentrum fuer Wissenschaftliches Rechnen
Universitaet Heidelberg, INF 368, D-69120 Heidelberg, GERMANY
Telephone: +49 6221 54 8869, Telefax: +49 6221 54 8868
E-mail: Bogdan.Costescu at IWR.Uni-Heidelberg.De