On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:35:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Michael Schwendt schrieb: > > On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 07:08:36 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> For those of you that are not on fedora-advisory-board find attached a > >> discussion with Michael Schwendt on that list that IMHO falls in the > >> area of the Packaging Committee. Could you guys please handle that? tia! > >> > >> If the Committee thinks some parts of this discussion is the area of the > >> FESCo please notify me or that the PC members that are part of FESCo > >> bring it over to FESCo. Also please try to get Michael involved into > >> this discussion -- he seems to be interested in this so he's probably > >> one of the best people to find a solution for the issue. > > > >> But I don't think there is anything to do for FESCo *before* there are > >> general packaging rules in the guidelines that clarify when Conflicts > >> are allowed/acceptable and when not (for both Core and Extras). Further: > >> Extras is no second class citizen -- if Core packages are allowed to > >> conflict with other parts of Core then Extras packages should IMHO be > >> allowed to Conflict with packages of Core, too. Sure, that should be > >> controlled and I think FESCo in the future should approve each Conflict > >> before it hits the repo. > > If you had added these extra paragraphs to the original thread on f-a-b > > list, I would have commented it with: > > "Why can't FESCO simply decide whether they want Fedora Extras > > to be free of package conflicts or not?" > > We *should* not "simply decide" without evaluating first if there are > valid reasons for conflicts. No, such "evaluation" is off-topic for this list. You're trying to complicate matters. Perhaps based on a misunderstanding of what types of conflicts are "in the wild". For a moment, just forget your corner-cases I've commented on before. > All we have until now is this discussion -- > we don't have rules or guidelines when conflicts are acceptable and when > not. > > And I don't see any reasons why those rules or guidelines need to be > different between Core and Extras, and thus it's IMHO business for the > packaging committee. If Spot/the Committee clearly says "No, that's not > our area of work" then I'll consider it a task for FESCo again. > > > Or rephrased: > > "Does FESCO want a full install of Fedora Extras and Core to be > > possible or not?" > > Well, Core has conflicts with other core packages afaik. So the above > will never work afaics, with or without Extras. Is that true? The stuff I'm interested in first is "Conflicts: foo" which actually prevent multiple packages to be installed at once. Such conflicts do exist in Fedora Extras and asks for steering. A simple decision without any need to argue about it. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
