Re: Meeting summary/minutes for 2010-03-09 FESCo meeting

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:22:37AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 13:08 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> 
> > Afaics this does not affect some minor issue, but a fundamental reason
> > why package maintainer decided to become Fedora package maintainers.
> > No volunteer package maintainer is in general forced to create updates
> > and I am very sure that the volunteer package maintainers usually do not
> > create updates that they do not want to use. So if you forbid package
> > maintainers to package the version they want or need to use, being a
> > fedora package maintainer becomes pretty useless for them.
> 
> I really think we want to have package maintainers whose motivation is a
> bit stronger than 'I use this myself, so, meh, why not package it'. At
> least for packages that are part of the default install, I would expect
> at least some awareness on the part of the packager that the work he is
> doing needs to fit into the larger whole which is the released product.

So we are back to "not all packages are equal". I agree, that the work
hast to fit in the whole community, but this is where there are at least
two big parties within Fedora, that have a complete opposite idea about
it. And an official view, about what this is for Fedora does afaik not
exist, yet.

Regards
Till

Attachment: pgpLwvbQ5xuCO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux