Sorry, I'm probably breaking threading here...my main work laptop went down, and I managed to fumble a command and lost some mail. Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 freenet de> writes: >On Sat, 2007-05-19 at 16:04 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote: >> Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 freenet de> writes: >> > ... We would have had opportunities to gain clarity, if you had not >> > reverted the split. >> >> This isn't actually true. The modules are still split out. >You have effectively reverted the split. > >> The changes >> were to make the perl-devel require the other split modules, and include >> the split modules in the default install. >Exactly this is the reversion - Forcing "module'ed" BR's and R's to gain >long term packaging stability was one of the prime objectives. > >Now, you're allowing people to continue their sloppy (bad) habits. Yes, I agree, it wasn't as much progress as we wanted. But it was sufficiently annoying to some people, that I agreed with the logic that these changes were too much, too late. [...] >> >> For now, at least, list list is low-traffic enough to support the >> >> SWAT-type activities...we just need to define how we interact with the >> >> package owners, and get their buy-in/permission/forgiveness. >> > Well, meanwhile, given how the merger changes Fedora's workflow, I am >> > not sure anymore if a "SWAT" team can work. Things which had been easy >> > before (and to some extend could have been scripted), now seem to become >> > inapplicable ... >> >> I'm not really sure what you mean here...what specific problems do you >> see? >You aren't subscribed to maintainers ? Then you'd better be. I am, but apparently hadn't followed it as closely as I should have. [...] >> I had planned to, but was convinced that the disruption to users and >> developers would be too great. I probably should've brought you into >> the discussion, considering the contributions you'd made. Sorry! >OSS development is based on "give and take" ... You will have to >understand that such lonesome and lately communicated decisions drive >external volunteers away. And other contributors were equally annoyed that we were making the change at all. [...] >> That's my gut feeling about it - but some people seem to think it would >> be worthwhile to split out everything. > >There likely are more modules which would make sense to be split out, >but a "split out everything" would be stupid. I don't see the point, either, but maybe someone will speak up who advocates it. >What I think the next steps should be >1. Revert your recent changes For F8, I'd like to do that as early as possible. >2. Reconsider the *-lib split. Consensus among various fedora-devel people seems to disagree with you. >3. Reflect this split to perl-modules. >.. >n. Check for further split-out candidates. I agree. Thanks, -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching
