On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:29:32PM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Wiki page is going to be a pain to maintain manually. How about using > bugzilla to track the issues? Using proven packager rights to fix the > issues? I will also volunteer to send any patches upstream. Well, specifically, we didn't want to use bugzilla. I'm not sure I'm speaking for everyone, but I think that's because it's not really the best place for minor upstream issues. (We agreed that bugzilla makes sense for cases where the script in question is only carried in the package or a Fedora-specific patch -- we _are_ the upstream.) We also discussed being okay with a plan to use proven packager rights to fix the issues, but I'd be concerned with accidentally introducing new bugs, so I'd like that to be a team of people who really care about this and will double-check each others' work. If there _are_ a team of such people, then I don't think we'll get in the way. > It is unclear to me whether FESCo considers this guideline something that > can be changed. To reiterate, the fundamental question that was placed > before FESCo is whether you consider a derivative or user wanting to change > /bin/sh to point to something else other than /bin/bash worth supporting or > not? I think it's worth... not really getting in the way of, but it seems pretty clear that we don't want an effort to do that to impose any additional cost on packagers. There are plenty of other things to worry about. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
