On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 16:18 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 16:14 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 22:00 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > * missing upstream: I think that fedorahosted is not right, a distro > > > neutral place should in my opinion be better. > > > > I don't really feel that way. That'd be like saying code.google.com > > isn't neutral because they also do a linux distro (or have threatened > > to) > > maybe I'm confused - I can see some concern about distro-specific > locations for abandoned/orphaned upstreams. But not for apps for whom > their upstream is hosted in fedorahosted. for those - it should be fine > - and not matter about the distro. > > -sv > Maybe I'm just jaded that fedorahosted is too 'distro specific'. I didn't want it to be, but I guess that's what you get when "fedora" is attached to the name. (having to sign the Fedora CLA to get an account doesn't help much either...) -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
