seth vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 07:17 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
And, from a *technical* point of view, I see no reason to fork either.
The only technical arguments I've heard so far are things like "feature
X is crazy!", but from my reading of:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/rpm-devel
Most/all of those "feature X's" are optional and/or can be disabled if
need-be.
Have you seen the rpmtag_arch removals from last week and the rpmrc
movement?
...
it's the foundation for everything we do.
Unfortunately, you're speaking mostly Greek to me here. If you expect
me (and others) to be able to make an informed judgment, you'll need to
expand on how this shakes our foundations so much.
Further, since it *is* such an important item, I'm sure someone (Paul,
you?) has mentioned your reservations about this on rpm-devel, right?
Rhetorical question only, for a point, because I just checked, and no
one has. As a matter of fact, the only feedback regarding this on
rpm-devel that I see (so far) has been positive.
We're not going to be able to merge those soon from what I can see.
...
we have already forked it. We just need to own up to our fork.
All I see is us (fedora) lagging *far* behind (version-wise) with only
selected back-ported features and bugfixes. Of course merging with
upstream would be painful at this point, but I see that mostly as a
problem of our own making.
-- Rex
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list
fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
