Hi Pat! On 06/01/2007 10:12 AM, Patrice Dumas wrote: > I am in disagreement with Marcela in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226529 > It is about the patches, and it begins here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226529#c15 > > My point is that the patches are unreviewable and cannot be given to > upstream or shared among packagers when upstream is dead, because some > patches touch the same code, leading to something that isn't readable. > Marcela disagrees because then there won't be a one patch one bug > relationship. My advice is to keep the patches to have this one patch > one bug relationship, but don't apply tem and instead have a one patch > one functionality instead. > > Advices? I think it was a good idea to involve -devel list... I've now read the bug... It's becoming a huge thread already. :-) The vixie-cron package contains so many patches and the release has been increased so many times now... Active development of cron is only done by distributions now. >From my point of view I would say it would be good to create a new 'upstream'. Maybe some trac project at fp.o or so... Let's say: vixie's dead, long live vixie :-) Or is there any good alternative for vixie-cron? I'm not 100 % sure, but I think I stumbled across some crond, that is under active development. Quick search on freshmeat or via google should be done. To bring it to a point: I don't think it's good to have Base OS packages in Fedora (and then in RHEL) that have no active upstream! If we want to stick with vixie, we should create a new upstream project - officially; And invite other distros to join. If we don't want to stick with it, we should find an alternative. -of -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
