On 05/28/2015 04:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Some things to consider:
A. If someone packages software into Fedora, are they obligated to
maintain all current and future software which might depend on it
in perpetuity?
B. If so, should that maintainer be allowed to veto the addition of new
dependencies?
If you vote yes to both, get ready for it to be even harder to package
software for Fedora.
I vote no to both. A is clearly a straw-man argument. If you are
maintaining package Foo, which is a dependency of Bar, you have no
obligation to support Bar. You do, however, have an obligation to make
an effort to support backward compatibility in Foo, so that Bar is
forced to upgrade itself to accommodate changes to Foo. Note, however,
that listing a specific version of Foo as a a dependency rather than
having *at least* that version makes all dependency issues caused by
this a Bar issue, not a Foo issue. And, of course, there's nothing
forcing you to continue as maintainer if you wish or need to stop.
B, of course, is an absurd idea, and I doubt that this was an accident.
Whoever maintains Foo has the obligation to see to it that any and all
packages that Foo depends on are listed properly, but has no say over
what other packages require Foo.
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
