On Mon, 2013-11-04 at 11:13 +0100, drago01 wrote: > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Frank Murphy <frankly3d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:03:45 +0100 > > drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >> Apps shipping from upstream direcly does not have to be closed > >> source. Firefox for instance could use that, or libreoffice, or > >> eclipse. If a user needs a newer version (or nightly build) without > >> having upstream worry about the specific distribution. > >> > >> > > I haven't read every post in the thread. > > Confused are use asking users to build nightlies > > (or other ver) from src? > > No we are just creating a way to allow those upstreams to create those > builds for users (as Florian said without having them to update to > rawhide or wait six months for the next release). Haven't read the whole thread yet, but in case it hasn't been said: "Build a way" would be great. I've said a few times that it'd be nice for there to be a cross-distro framework for third-party app distribution. "Promote as the Proper Way To Get Apps On GNOME / Fedora Desktop" would NOT be great. Having spent a lot of time thinking about both sides of the debate I'm still firmly in the 'coherent distribution is the ideal state' camp. Upstream distribution is probably never going to go away entirely, and it'd be good to make it as painless and reliable as possible _where it's really necessary to use it_. But it should never be the primary/preferred method of software distribution on Fedora, in my opinion. It should always be an exception. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
