Axel Thimm wrote : > Just to make my point clear: I'm ranting for FE breaking ATrpms, of > course, but even for active ATrpms-agnostics there should be one very > important issue: Why package beta software, when you don't have to, > and why shove it right into productive repos? This just lowers the > quality of the repo as a total. I for one am extremely conservative > with my own packaging in FE, and I think most people here do so the > same to keep the QA standards high. Then ask the right question to the right person : Ask the zaptel, libpri and asterisk packages owner why he made such a decision. Note that in your first email you write : "Note that for some packages it really makes sense to use beta/prereleases, VCS cuts and the like, but there is no reason to do so in this case." I agree that it makes sense in some cases, but I have no idea if it does in this particular one, nor why it would or wouldn't. I couldn't find any info in the reviews after a quick glance, so I can only once again suggest you ask the person who made the choice. Matthias -- Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/ Fedora Core release 5.92 (FC6 Test3) - Linux kernel 2.6.18-1.2798.fc6 Load : 0.06 0.04 0.05 -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
