Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 03:16:51PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
-----
PD> After some thinking and looking at some packages, I came to the
PD> conclusion that having upstream as primary maintainer in fedora
PD> should be avoided if possible.
-----
I object to this as a general rule. Not only is there no way to
enforce this except by agreement, but it is simply not possible to
reasonably make that generalization and I also find it to take a
rather dim view of the potentially enormous contributions which could
be made by upstream developers if we could only get them interested.
Ok, my statement was a bit too much. To state it in a more sensible
manner, the extras community should really make sure that the upstream
maintainers maintaining their package in fedora extras do it in a manner
suitable for fedora and not with upstream objectives.
Call me naive, but I still don't see why you're assuming that upstream
maintainers have objectives that are, in general, at odds with the
Fedora project.
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
