On 09/14/2015 09:57 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 16:54 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> On 12 September 2015 at 04:10, Adam Williamson >> <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I agree that the discussion here needs to be more broad-based; see >>> the >>> other thread fork. I was just providing support for Stephen's >>> contention that this is not some airy-fairy theoretical problem, >>> there >>> are multiple examples of real things that people *wanted* to have >>> packaged that are not packaged because the unbundling process was >>> too >>> onerous. >> >> This is the idea behind COPR and Fedora Playground though - ensuring >> that packages that are *legally* acceptable for redistribution are >> easy to publish and consume for Fedora and EPEL users, while still >> being clearly distinct from the ones that have passed full review >> against the packaging guidelines. >> >> What we haven't managed to do yet is update the package review >> process >> to better account for the distinction, such as by adopting a "COPR >> first" model, where folks put a package up in COPR with bundled >> components, and then either keep it there indefinitely, or >> collaborate >> with others on the unbundling effort. > > Just to be awkward - I kinda found working with COPRs a PITA the only > time I tried it and went back to using my own server space. This of > course isn't an option for everyone, but it *is* an option for some of > us who are already packaging stuff, and maybe I'm not the only one who > prefers it? :) COPR is getting better all the time and I find it pretty usable these days. The big hurdle now for actually supporting packaging efforts in it IMO is lack of permission controls. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion@xxxxxxxx Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
