On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:41 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:06:59 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:34 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > > > > > > * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come > > > > > promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is > > > > > important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of > > > > > the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the > > > > > majority has moved on to do only the current branches. > > > > > > > > Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they > > > > should be able to do it. > > > > > > That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. > > Yes, and where is the problem? > > The risk of FE becoming the infamous dumping ground of poorly maintained > packages. Face it: It already partially is - Such is the situation, no reason to complain about :-) > > FE is a volunteered effort, so this is inevitable, even in FC(current). > > It's not black and white. Agreed. > By more and clear policies, volunteers can be > given an environment in which it possible [and easier] to contribute where > help is needed. And help is needed where bugzilla response times are high, > where packagers lack test machines, where packagers discontinue support > for legacy branches, where orphans are created, ... ... "Tag teams"/"Task forces" .. set up a pool of volunteers to test packages on less common machines. > > > We try to move away from Fedora Extras being a second class citizen. > > > > And how is this problem related to FE-EOL? > > See the other replies. FC has a well-defined lifespan. It's not even close to be in community control nor in FE's. > FE has not. RH and FESCO have been using their powers to take arbitrary decisions, so why don't you do it again, if you feel there is a problem? > Fedora Legacy is a project with objectives. Legacy is a project of their own. They have the freedom to do what they want, so coordination with FE is _their_ problem, it isn't mine and actually isn't FE's. As I've said many times before, I don't see any sense in a separate Fedora Legacy project. To me, a "Fedora Legacy Team" within FE would be much more useful. Ralf -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
