> If we control what is > indexed, then development could continue as part of a Fedora > sub-project. i.e. fedora.redhat.com could implement a > DMCA/Fedora-compliant implementation (albeit limited), while Brad's full > version could be hosted elsewhere. This probably defeats the purpose of > Brad's goals for the Tracker however and wouldn't be very practical.. It's not outside the realm of possibility. Having a more selective frontend with only Core and Extras packages at the "official" site would not be particularly difficult. It'd just be the same software with a smaller set of repositories indexed in the db. I'd prefer if the selective Tracker at least included a link to and explanation of the more complete version. The main issue is simply one of cost-benefit: Is it worth the extra visibility/officialness to have two interfaces to the data? What do we stand to lose by keeping Tracker a single, separate entity from the fedora.redhat.com stuff? As I see it, a sense of officialness and making the Tracker easier to find are the two biggest things. Both would be nice, but could be done without. I don't know. I could go either way on this. Anybody (especially those who can lay down requirements wrt more official inclusion into the distro) feel strongly either way? --Brad
