On Mon, 2006-10-16 at 11:36 -0500, Karen Pease wrote: > Re: Forked packages: To be honest, I can understand the concept of forked > packages, esp. back before Fedora made it easier to get changes into packages > into the RH line. What immediately comes to mind is build options: to reduce > dependencies, people tend to configure packages with the minimum number of > deps to meet their functionality requirements. If a repo needs more > functionality that requires additional deps, they either have to get the > original distro to carry those deps (sometimes a hard sell, or even > impossible if the licensing doesn't work out), or fork. There are other options. You can make it possible to build the extra functionality into a separate subpackage so that not everyone needs it. Or even make it possible to build it from a separate source package entirely, so that it can exist only in the Free World and not in Fedora if that's really necessary. Those options require work though, so aren't often pursued by mere package-monkeys; you need proper _maintainers_ for that. -- dwmw2 -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
