Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #21 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-02-26 14:55:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #19) > @Christopher Wickert, Cinnamon is a fork of GNOME Shell. We can't use that > guideline to prohibit forks and it doesn't apply once there is a different > namespace. Who said so? It applies as long as we cannot be sure that bugs and security issues in one project get fixed in the other. > In other words, I don't see any problems. But I do. 1. Code is forked for no reason. Just look at the commits, the biggest change was updating the headers to use the new address of the FSFE. 2. There seems to be no exchange between GNOME and Cinnamon, not even for trivial issues. Did the Cinnamon people bother to submit the patch that changes the FSFE address upstream? I don't think so. 3. We are working around problems here that are already fixed upstream. Just one example: In the mutter spec Leigh is using "-Wno-error=deprecated-declarations". This was fixed in clutter already on 2012-02-07 in commit 2e63de5c. The same fix was applied to gnome-shell in commit e3d0b6f9 but Leigh is using "--enable-compile-warnings=minimum" instead. 4. Given the number of commits GNOME Shell receives, do you think the Cinnamon people will be able to catch up? (In reply to comment #18) > Sorry I don't see the issue with having forked libs. Please ask yourself. Will you be able to - figure out where forking was necessary and what could be compiled against the original code? - port bugfixes from gnome-shell to cinnamon. This might occur with security issues or bugs that cause data loss and in this case you cannot wait for cinnamon upstream to catch up. I'm not even sure they can catch up at all. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review