-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Brian Pepple wrote: >> /topic Status-Update: Compat Policy >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JeremyKatz/DraftCompatPackages - jeremy > > This proposal seems to allow the maintainer to veto any compatibility > packages. Would FESCo retained the authority to override maintainer's > wishes here? The rationale for limiting compatibility packages seem weak. > I also find this a bit too arbitrarily weighted in favor of the non-compat maintainer's preference. I would find it much better to have a list of extra criteria that are needed for a compat package to be accepted and the reasons for each criteria. This would be similar to how the Games SIG has additional Packaging Guidelines that are specific to games. (But in this case, the additional criteria would not necessarily be packaging related as it's coming from FESCo.) - -Toshio -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG3uUBX6yAic2E7kgRAlebAKCMj8k2/c44gnbdrjxdPH/WzSX7lACgjJ3w PkEbyZFB9yOQNefz7cy2JHQ= =3z8h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
