On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 04:52:48PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >people not declaring their bundles and not care about policies did the > >same before: not declare it and not ask for exceptions - there is a > >logical flow in "now that i don't need to ask FPC i don't declare it" > Exactly, that's what I would consider a serious regression. But re-read what you're just replying to. The thing is, there's all sorts of bundling going on all throughout Fedora under the radar. It's like banning alcohol. It might seem like a policy that'd benefit society overall, but turns out that it doesn't make people stop drinking — just drives it underground. This approach encourages people to, uh, drink responsibly. There's still regulation and labeling. Now, if only we could figure out how to _tax_ bundling, we'd be all set. > This proposal effectively is a carte-blanche to bundling and > carelessness, which I would expect to seriously impact the quality > of Fedora. It seems pretty careful to me, and a lot more prescriptive than "carte-blanche". > > >the opposite is more likely: people trying to avoid the FPC burden now > >can declare it without fearing somebody takes notice and points out a > >violation > If they don't care or are not aware about the consequences of their > bundling? > > Like I've said many times before, I feel Fedora needs a serious > vulnerability in a widespread bundled or static library, such that > people finally comprehend the harm of bundling. Of course, we've certainly had this happen in the past. I hear you saying that we're losing that lesson and need to re-learn it. But, I don't think we've actually forgotten it — I certainly haven't. I just think we need to try a different approach, because the old one worked well to a point, but also comes at a big cost. -- 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
