On Wed, 2004-10-13 at 20:54 +1000, Alan Milligan wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Sorry, I should have started this in a separate thread to begin with, so > please bear with me for continuing here. > > As stated earlier, we have a firm agenda to ensure up2date remains both > that current with Python and a generalised rpm gui tool. > > As with the earlier post, I'm not too concerned about missing FC3 > cutoff, we're all committed to the long-term of Fedora. > > As outlined, removing the OpenSSL package, rpclib, and other sins, is by > no means trivial (although not that complicated either). But it is > certainly too complex to expect bugzilla to usefully manage the process. It still needs to go in bugzilla whether or not design discussion is going on else where. > At the least, it requires coordination and discussion to agree that all > parties interests are met - I am not interested in doing work that's not > going to be accepted, nor in working upon out of date, irrelevant > images, or difficult back-ports. I can understand that. fedora-devel may be a bit high traffic for this. It might be worth punting off rhn-users, but that's not quite right. Maybe it'd be worth having a seperate list. > Can I please be put in touch with the affected RH people (on or off the > list), so we can decide upon a manner to proceed, somewhat in the vane > of other open projects we all know and love? rpm --changelog is your friend: alikins@xxxxxxxxxx You probably want to pull in the current development too - current maintainer CC'd. as they are intrested in the other end. Paul
