On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 23:23 -0600, Patrick W. Barnes wrote: > On Thursday 02 November 2006 15:50, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > As long as the SRPMs remain available. If the respin involves packages > > where we don't keep the RPMS/SRPMS for the life of the ISO respin then > > we'd be in trouble. > > > > I know this would cause trouble for things from FC-devel. I think it > > would be a problem for FC-updates and FE as well. > > > > Don't forget CVS. It's just as valid as a source provider as the SRPMS. Is it? This might fall under the letter of the GPL but does it follow the spirit? Mirroring isos and burning them onto a disk is a no-brainer compared to checking the version of a binary rpm you have, constructing a cvs tag from it, and doing a cvs checkout from fedora cvs. Not impossible, just not on the same level of difficulty. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ 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
