Re: Mass issue: /usr/bin/env dependency

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:00:40PM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I think the thing that the problems packagers are looking at is the
> following:
> 
> 1) They are going to have 'non-upstream' patches for all their
> software.. which is just one more thing to keep up with every update.
> 2) Most of this software is not stuff they care about. It is branches
> on a tree for the only reason they packaged it up in the first place.
> So it is busy work from what they want.
> 3) This isn't the only rodeo they are putting this package in. So this
> patch set looks like a special snowflake patch they have to keep up
> with.
> 4) There is a difference between rules written down and rules in
> action. While the rule has been this should be done, the fact that so
> many packages have never done so and no one has pulled them for that..
> says the real rule is it is not needed. Making a written rule an
> action rule takes enforcement which always causes resistance.

Good summary, and I definitely understand *these* problems. Just not
the other one. :)

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux