----- Original Message ----- > On 03/18/2015 05:46 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Mike Pinkerton wrote: > > > > > > What I don't understand is the wisdom of an official Fedora > > "product" endorsing a copr when either the software or packaging (or > > both) is not of sufficient quality to make it into the official > > Fedora repo. > > > > > > I don't think of it as a endorsement. > I see them as a means of discouraging people from packaging for Fedora: > > Ask yourself: "Why should I package a package properly, when I can get > off 'cheap'?" - msuchy's rationale is along this line. > > > It is making them more easily > > discoverable but there is going to be a prompt of some sort that warns > > them of the nature of such software and users get to choose whether they > > are willing to accept that tradeoff for immediate access. One might > > choose to use say, Chromium regardless of the bundling issues for example. > > There are many more ways why a package not to be eligible for Fedora > than "bundling": > - Illegal/patent-encumbered in the US, but legal to distribute in other > countries. > - Legal to distribute binaries, repackaged for "packager lazyness", > (e.g. Java) or complexity (foreign arch binaries needed to support > cross-toolchains). > - Content-only packages (Videos, Audiofiles). > - Packages with ethical/political controversial contents. > ... > > In other words, if you are really serious about this plan, you need some > authority to continuously review the packages in such "endorsed" repos, > technically, legally and "politically". And that's what Council agreed on. The process is not yet set but it may end up on Council's table. By the way, for non-good stuff you mentioned above - it's already not allowed to do it in Coprs - https://fedorahosted.org/copr/wiki/UserDocs#WhatIcanbuildinCopr So for Copr, I'm in support of this proposal as it perfectly fits with the idea of Playground repository I helped to draft. Copr is part of Fedora project (and I even would like it more integral part as part of Koji). For repositories outside Fedora Project, I stated on the Council meeting, that I'd require opt-in/opt-out consent from user before even search for such disabled repository is allowed. But it would be one dialog with ack/nack and explanation what does it mean. Jaroslav > > > Ralf > > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
