Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> For a specific example: suppose that a particular VM host provides its
> guest tools only as a closed-source binary that they ship. Do we
> permit them to request the inclusion of their service in presets under
> the reasoning that it would enhance users' performance on those
> systems, or do we disallow any non-Fedora software from being included
> in the presets?
>
> What about a third-party repository that provides a closed-source
> service that enhances an open-source project (for example, a
> closed-source codec server that works with open-source encoding
> software)?
Can't those just ship their own preset files? While the Fedora Packaging
Guidelines disallow Fedora packages from doing that, the above packages are
by definition NOT Fedora packages and hence not bound by those Fedora
Packaging Guidelines.
Third-party repositories can choose whether to maintain a central preset
list like Fedora does or whether to allow each package to drop in its own
preset file.
Considering that systemd allows multiple preset files to be present and
enabled on the system simultaneously, I do not see a good reason why we
should maintain presets for third-party software in the Fedora preset. I
also see this as a possible source of name conflicts or even a venue for
deliberate name hijacking attacks (where a malicious third-party service
claims to be a default-enabled service from another third party).
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
