On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 8:38 AM Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 8:07 AM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:47:44PM +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > Link to the FESCo ticket: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3165 > > > > > > and I'm very upset > > > > Assume best intent first of all. An injunction is a temporary thing > > to allow some space for a decision to be made. > > > > (I added my personal opinion to the ticket itself) > > > > First of all, thank you for assuming best intent. > > I'll apologize first for the terseness of those messages; I was in a > rush between meetings and I left out basically all of the context (and > probably used a stronger word -- injunction -- than was strictly > called for). I'm sorry for that. > > Next, I'll address Kevin's comment that the "injunction" lacked a > quorum vote to enforce: you are correct. That's the whole reason for > it: the issue came up at the end of an already-long FESCo meeting and > we did not have time to discuss it in the detail it deserves. The > intent was not to make a ruling (which was impossible without quorum), > but to instead indicate that the package review should refrain from > landing until FESCo makes a determination of its suitability and > alignment with Fedora's goals. This is as much for the packagers > involved as anyone; we don't want you to be putting in effort that > FESCo might ultimately require you to revert if the decision goes that > way. > > Again, I apologize for not doing a better job communicating that yesterday. > > > Now, as for my personal stance on the issue upon a night's reflection > (some of this is in reply to comments on > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3165 that I feel should be discussed in > a more public forum): > > 1) I agree that if a Fedora packager wants to maintain a package, then > that package should not be excluded from Fedora except under very > exceptional cases. > 2) FESCo is ultimately the arbiter of what software comprises "Fedora > Linux" as made available to the rest of the world. In practice, this > mostly means the install/Live media contents as well as container and > VM images that are released as official Fedora deliverables. > 3) Fedora has a long-standing and well-communicated stance that we are > a Wayland distribution first and foremost and that X11 support is > intended as a migration-support tool rather than a first-class > citizen. > 4) There was a comment on the FESCo ticket to the effect of '"you must > move to Wayland because no one maintains X11!". Here are some people > who are maintaining X11 packages, so let them do their thing.' This is > misleading, as the move to Wayland is specifically because the > upstream of X11 *itself* is largely unmaintained. These packages are > not maintaining X11, they are adding new dependencies on it. One additional point I forgot to address: the initial concern was that the KDE SIG would be implicitly responsible for maintaining these packages if they are included in the main repository. From a purely technical perspective, I think that we should state clearly that the KDE SIG would be required only to provide advance notice of major changes but would NOT be responsible for ensuring that these packages adapt to them. Of course, communicating that to users is harder (and they'll naturally report bugs to the wrong place in many cases), but I think the KDE SIG is completely permitted to refuse and retarget any issues that come up to the appropriate group. > My proposal for consideration is this: > "FESCo will allow these packages in the main Fedora repositories, > however they may not be included by default on any release-blocking > deliverable (ISO, image, etc.)" -- _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
