Christopher Brown wrote:
On 10/01/2008, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:38:42PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:19 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
It isn't that simple. Do we also want community handle on fedora or
not? I really like redhat leadership and innovations, but I don't want
to be a puppet either. If people from the community with specific needs
and wants are to be accepted in fedora, it means that radical simplicity
is not possible.
Oh nice. Now you're playing the "RH vs. community" card. Priceless. News
flash: this is _not_ about RH vs. the community. It's about realizing
that software development is _hard_. It's about realizing that throwing
It is not exactly "RH vs. community". I just want to make sure that
things like xdm, initng, fluxbox, compat packages, xpdf or a non linux
kernel (all are things that are duplicates of other packages) are still
welcomed in fedora. After all it is not necessarily an issue if not, but
this should be stated explicitely.
My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
Isn't it still the case?
Of course but at some point, particularly with something such as
separate subsystem stacks in the kernel, someone has to make a
technical choice. In this instance JuJu was enabled in 7+ with the
intention to work with the maintainers to resolve issues as they
arose. Firewire in Linux is a mess but it is improving, thanks largely
to the JuJu team and if I may say, the inclusion of said stack in
Fedora. One of the maintainers is extremely active on the Fedora
bugzilla.
I think here (Christopher says it well) is the most salient point on 'is it
welcome or not'... the problem that started the thread (JuJu new vs old stack)
was simply the primary maintainer choosing to go with new, and if anyone (other
than that maintainer who chose not to) had provided the appropriate
compatibility/switching/coexistence patches to have both available I am pretty
certain that it could have and would have been done. I mean look at the history
and how long the simple mta switcher app survives because someone provided it
when other options than sendmail were available.
So Patrice I think the answer is and always will be 'its welcome' but the issue
is who will do it. When that choice (or any other hard choice of innovation vs
current working compatibility) is made it is up to those who need current
compatibility to help keep it available. As others have said in the thread to
plan on the primary maintainers handling it in a 'keep everything forever'
fashion is guaranteed to be madness and a big failure.
--
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul@xxxxxxxxx> <ajfarris@xxxxxxxxx>
gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
---- ----
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
