Hi, Hm... we want to keep Darktable featured in GNOME Software. But I think we are taking the anti-bundling crusade a bit too far, especially considering we're about to *mandate* bundling for the *vast majority* of libraries by nature of xdg-app. I'm extremely hesitant to go down the route of removing applications from Fedora due to packaging guideline issues, then turning around and making them available in coprs and featuring them in Software. That provides no incentive for packagers to fix the issues, and heralds a future where packagers don't even attempt to get packages into Fedora, but just use coprs instead. (It's already happening [1]!) Anyway, I've been reading [2] and [3] in particular, and it seems like this is a classic example of where a permanent bundling exception would be appropriate: the application and library need to be updated in tandem, different applications will want to update the library at different times, and the upstream library maintainers expressly intend it to be bundled. Either the applications bundle the library, or we have to package multiple versions of the library, each one intended to be used by a particular application, and what good does that serve? Meanwhile, the Darktable developers agreed to work on eliminating the bundling issues for all other libraries, which indicates a temporary bundling exception would be appropriate for those cases. It's discouraging that FPC feels otherwise. Michael [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-September/2140 77.html [2] https://github.com/klauspost/rawspeed/issues/109 [3] https://github.com/klauspost/rawspeed/issues/109#issuecomment-126295602 -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
