Bryan J. Smith wrote:
This actually opens a whole new can of worms for the fedora project.. Most of these plans should really be split into 3 different repositories:To start, let me tell you what I think, and where I am coming from.
1. I consider Fedora Core to be Red Hat Linux 2. Fedora Core will bloat to 5, 6 and more CDs
As such, all the legacy needs to be in it, along with anything new.
There is no way to avoid this, without breaking compatibility and
assumptions. Is it a bad thing? That's debateable. There is much
good to adding more and more as part of the "full" install,
Scribus, OpenGroupware.org (OGo), Firefox/Thunderbird, etc...
- Supported Core
- Support additional packages
- Unsupported additional packages
That way the core is a solid base on which to base everything else. The supported packages would be bugzilla'ble and would either be maintained by Redhat or by a trusted maintainer (who has earned this title and trust over time in the unsupported playground) and the unsupported would be a great place for well working packages that are not maintained by a trusted maintainer or redhat.
This way anyone can try to contribute packages (as u said, for things like OpenGroupWare.org, etc) and the maintainer can prove and show he can maintain, fix and support this contribution over time before it gets moved to 'officialy included'. in essence this follows the debian structure, packages are only included if there is a valid and trusted maintainer for them.
Reasoning for this is that it would be a _lot_ worse if there was a serious data-destroying bug or security compromising bug in a package that no one would fix (in a timely and correct fashion) then it would be to not include a package.
