On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 13:59 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > That's easier for releng but just as hard for the packager. Yes, it is unfortunate that our package set got to the point where flags existed in some of the packages, and that the unwritten rule from RHL and Fedora Core didn't make it forward into Fedora, the no flags rule. We'd have to do some clean up, and potentially lose some software in the process. We have to decide if we want to trade some software (and likely some packagers) for the ability for our software to be distributed to rather large targets, such as China, and potentially gain contributors, not just packagers. > If you want something that's truly easier, then I propose, "flags are > just another piece of data provided by upstream unless US law makes us > care." There is another concern here. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) will likely continue the "no flags" policy, which means that any software within Fedora that RHEL would like to ship, the packaging will have to fork, and patches will have to be created. This isn't Fedora's problem, but something for RHT to note when it is deciding what software to take and how much work will be necessary to make it RHEL worthy. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
