On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 05:22:43PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Josh Boyer schrieb: > > As for the third party repo aspect of this, that is quite difficult. > > There are potentially tons of third party repos, which already conflict > > with each other. We cannot show preference for one or the other. That > > does not mean that a third party repository maintainer cannot open a > > bug. It just means that we cannot expect Extras maintainers to go > > looking for problems in each and every third party repo before updating > > something. > > +1 I think this is a dangerous attitude. W/o going into ugly details I believe the reason that Fedora has such a cluttered 3rd party repository support in comparison to all other distros is just because of that historic strategic and tactical errors (IMO) that were at the beginning of the project alienating most 3rd party repositories. The last years have shown that this can be undone, but unfortunately at a slow pace, and with often setbacks. In order to close the gaps in the community you need to follow embracement politics, not (actively) ignore and alienate parts of it. It was just a few days ago that someone ranted about a 3rd party repo forking Fedora, and this is just an example which shows that the actors are reversed. I deliberately left off details to not micro-discuss again about repo foorpms and package bar and baz, I'm just targetting the big picture. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgp0QX85GJnym.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
