On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 17:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 11:19 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 05:01:07AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >>> As I see it, community contributed Fedora is only able to handle > >>> "trivial, mass-market" packages. I'd presume that most "non-trivial > >>> packages", which currently are part of Core and 100% under RH control > >>> (E.g. GCC, kernel, glibc, perl ...) would have never made it into FE. > >> That's not so obvious since, although they are very complicated packages > >> they are also very widely used. > > Are you seriously telling me you would accept a package which has 30 or > > more patches applied? > > > > You would tell the maintainer to tell upstream to fix them. > > Not in all cases. Sometimes there are valid reasons to patch. The only legitimate reason to patch is time-lags between upstream and current version. If this isn't reason, then patching is a strong indication for something about the development model not being functional. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
