On 7/31/06, Rahul <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote: > > Default or not, at least the name of the repos imply that they can > have different governing rules. Core could/should have more strict > policies that Extras. I don't understand why this shouldn't be so. >> -- The name of the repositories are largely retained for historical reasons. The naming was rather unfortunate but we have been steadily working towards eliminating differences between these repositories. It makes managing things more harder to introduce new policies that differ across these repositories at this point and having a lax policy in extras compared to core reinforces a mistaken impression that we consider extras a secondary repository. Rahul
In that case I understand. The naming is rather unfortunate as they bring about ideas, that seem to nolonger meet their current situation. Good luck in overcoming that issue, I have no ideas on that myself. -- To be updated... -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
