Re: RFC: Proposal for a more agile "Fedora.next" (draft of my Flock talk)

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

 



On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 05:39:33PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> This proposal doesn't seem to make rings 0 or 1 particularly more
> integrated - just smaller; and it places a higher barrier to entry to
> adding useful functionality to the core.

I didn't intend to say that. 

> Want to add new a JSON library, HTTPS library with OCSP support, DNS
> resolver to the integrated core?  Sorry, 30% of the stacks are on a
> 2-year lifecycle and can't use it now; other 30% have decided to ship
> unmodified upstream code and will not integrate any Fedora
> Core-specific patches.

I definitely didn't intend to say the "sorries" you've put there. In fact,
quite the opposite. How can I make that more clear?

-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
-- 
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