On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:36:42AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > Well, in this case, I think it should be killed. Having prelink in the > distribution implies that it is expected that it should, which means > that all the other packages that have to support/work-around/etc. > prelink still have to have all those hacks. Maintainers would still be > expected to fix problems and such. It creates a burden on other > packages, just by being in the distribution. I don't think that is necessarily the case. Or, at least, I think that it shouldn't be the case even if it is currently. We've got thousands of packages in the distribution, and requiring this level of burden for other packages from any package which passes review is a path to madness. > If it doesn't appear to provide a significant benefit, and there's no > expectation of support (for some meaning of "support"), it should go > away. IMHO this is one of the differences between a "distribution" and > a "random collection of packages". We need both (although I'd chose a more positive adjective than 'random'), and a way to draw the line. -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
