On 21Dec2006 08:08, les mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: | Les wrote: | >[...]I think this will make Fedora more attractive, especially if they get | >the stuff all bound together so that all the chasing down of plugins, | >dependencies and packages can be done prior to the new package being | >shipped. Also this should permit tighter control over the entire suite | >of system and tools, enabling a distribution that will be more or less | >autonomous and correctly configured at the outset. | | Won't this just force the replacement of fedora extras with some | other place that is not so tightly controlled? Livna, freshrpms, rpmforge and atrpms don't already fill that niche? "More controlled" looks, to me, like it means "without the horrible dependancy breakages" - they're talking about better consistency checking are the control described. By giving leaf packages more directly to maintainers the "update" flipside of that should become "less controlled", but also less flakey. And it looks like the non-leaf packages will farm out more directly too, later. -- Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ ...so I can no longer retrieve Jon's original post to quote exactly. I believe I can paraphrase him quite accurately, however [...] This is exactly what Jon has said in his writing, and I don't believe I am misunderstanding him. - Jack Poller, contradicting himself -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
