Hello, The issue of upstream disappearing is somewhat common (some examples in mind, former vixie-cron, dos2unix, libnet), maybe we could have a policy about it. There are also some packages fedora is upstream for, covered in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#head-413e1c297803cfa9de0cc4c56f3ac384bff5dc9e and some that are not really packages, like redhat-rpm-config. I think that we really should avoid having any package packaged in a srpm only (which is the case for package with missing upstream and packages fedora is upstream for), and try to use systematically version control system for the packages fedora is upstream for, even packages that are not really independent packages, like redhat-rpm-config. I think that the 2 cases should be handled differently: * fedora specific: on https://fedorahosted.org/ * missing upstream: I think that fedorahosted is not right, a distro neutral place should in my opinion be better. I also think that it should be coordinated with other distros. In my opinion discussing about it on the new distributions list and announcing on that list should be interesting. And once things are settled, I think that there should be an obligation for the fedora maintainers to use that new hosting (or another, but this one would be the classical one). What do you think? -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
