Le jeudi 24 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 09:06 -0500, Gene C. a Ãcrit :
> (...)
> Comments?
Sorry for my English.
Sad news :
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 02:07:26PM -0500, Build System wrote:
> python-twisted-1.3.0-3
> ----------------------
> * Mon Feb 21 2005 Jeremy Katz <katzj@xxxxxxxxxx> - 1.3.0-3
> - disable the -docs subpackage for now
I read many things about how to reduce CD count.
Nothing really "shocking".
But what I *really* don't like is the split of project between FC and FE
like exim in FC and exim-doc in FE *only* because exim-doc is "too big".
I want exim in FC or in FE and not some parts in FC and other parts in
FE.
1- The documentation is *important*. Documenting is not a pleasant job.
2- Red Hat does not provide clear rules to chose which documentation
"deserve" to be in FC.
3- The average joe (me) expect to find the documentation in the same
place than the program. A program with its documentation is the same
whole thing.
If Red Hat state "*all* documentation will be in FE" I'll said "OK, go
for it" (this imply to create a lot of prog-doc packages). If someone
ask me where is the documentation I will point FE (end of the story).
But with this new policy I'll reply with "I don't really know, it's
depend on the feeling of Red Hat".
Other point I don't like, Red Hat is introducing the size criteria :
- "Sorry, good project but too big".
Until now, Fedora is a meritocracy and not a "weightwatcherscracy".
I know that FC can't provide all softwares around the world. I this case
increase the level of admittance and forget the weightwatchers
dictatorship.
The big KDE deserve to be in FC (even if I don't use it) but with this
new policy you see some people requesting to move KDE to FE. Other want
to drop i18n, ... It's bad(tm).
-devel package : 15O Mo
Perhaps we can move all development packages and tools to FE.
Fedora need clear rules.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
