On Monday 02 January 2006 21:33, Jeff Pitman wrote: > On 1/3/06, Jarod Wilson <jarod@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday 02 January 2006 18:12, Warren Togami wrote: > > > If you have concerns about individual packages, please file bugs in Red > > > Hat Bugzilla. Changes can be made to individual Core/Extras packages > > > are usually general bug fixes and enhancements. It is wrong to expect > > > Fedora to make special concessions only to work around problems > > > introduced by 3rd parties. If it is the right thing to do in general > > > cases, then it is proper to make changes to Core/Extras. > > > > I'm not talking so much about problems introduced by 3rd-parties as I am > > about problems/deficiencies uncovered by 3rd-parties, i.e., fixing > > packages in Core in a timely fashion to eliminate the need of 3rd-party > > packagers to replace Core components. > > Also, it's good to have allies on the inside. Very true. Most 3rd-party repos don't, apparently. > See jpackage FAQ about > "I tried to install foo on Fedora Core 2, but got lots of error > messages and/or things don't work": http://www.jpackage.org/faq.php > > Note the line: > > """This issue should be fixed in Fedora Core 3, thanks to Red Hat's > involvement in JPackage.""" So the anti-3rd-party repository stance isn't unilaterally applied against all 3rd-party repos, I take it? > Google cache from one of the messages since the archive is broke: > http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:I2Me1f05Eb0J:lists.zarb.org/pipermail/jp >ackage-discuss/2004-October/011253.html+jpackage-discuss++011253&hl=en&clien >t=firefox-a > > Sound familiar? And, in about 6 months "Core/Extras vs 3rd Party" > might show up on this list again... Yeah, most likely. But hey, if JPackage can get Red Hat's help, I don't see why other repositories can't... -- Jarod Wilson jarod@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpQDN7EpDa7Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
