On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 04:18:00PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 09/10/2015 04:06 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >On Thu, 2015-09-10 at 09:03 -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > >> > >> > >>On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@redhat.c > >>om> wrote: > >>>I assume that subject line got your attention. > >>> > >>Most definitely. :) > >> > >>So it's basically the same but without FPC as a gatekeeper? Do you > >>have any proposals for enforcement? A periodic query of Provides > >>(bundled-foo) and a BZ requesting a review? Sometime projects > >>enable unbundling over time. > >> > > > > > >I don't know that enforcement is strictly necessary. Maintainers that > >care will self-enforce. Maintainers that don't care won't be aided by > >this. > > Are you talking about upstream maintainers of fedora maintainers? I took this to mean Fedora maintainers, not upstream, but on second read it seems equally true in both cases. > The cause of the majority of cases of bundling is upstream maintainers who > violently refuse to comprehend the evilness of bundling and who use bundling > because "it's so convenient" to them. Use of terms like "violent" and "evil" belies an attitude toward upstream developers that I don't believe helps either upstream or Fedora. > >"Enforcement" implies adding more heavy process, which is part of the > >problem this is trying to avoid. > You don't seem to be aware about the fact FPC already tries to enforce > unbundling. Yes, this is a heavy and time-consuming process, esp. on > occasions upstream's behave stubborn and refuse to listen. I doubt OP is unaware of this. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
