On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > drago01 wrote: >> P.S: reading this from you was unexpected but nice to see, considering >> that you answered my question why most of the core KDE packages have >> closed ACLs (is this still the case?) you said "because the KDE SIG >> is already doing a good job" (which is no reason why other people >> should not be allowed to do a good job too ;) ) > > Most of KDE has now been opened up to provenpackager, only the core packages > (kdelibs and kdebase*) are still closed. And that's probably also not > needed, I won't complain if they get opened up (as long as people don't > start committing nonsense like "follow GNOME HIG", "put the GenericName > into Name" or the like ;-) ). > > Still, I must also say that I don't see why we're expected to open up while > at the same time the usual suspects (kernel, glibc etc. and also the > Firefox stack (*)) are allowed to stay locked down. :-/ How's that fair? > The same rules should apply to *all* packages, no exceptions. Yeah as I already said I am for opening all packages. > Kevin Kofler > > (*) which is really worth a rant of its own - why do we accept those asinine > patch approval policies which keep us from doing cooperative development > and sometimes even from fixing real issues (I remember the > hunspell/xulrunner ABI fiasco) instead of just renaming the f***ing thing > like Debian does? The name "Firefox" is worth having for marketing reasons. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
