On 11/20/2009 01:22 PM, Yaakov Nemoy wrote:
nn2009/11/20 Ralf Corsepius<rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx>:
Hi,
There is a package (london pictures) under review[1], which I consider to be
a corner case wrt. "Code vs. content"[2].
The problem I have with this package providing a precedence of how to
circumvent Fedora's regulations/guidelines etc. to use Fedora as means to
distribute "mere content".
In other words, I fear this package is a precedence to opens a can of worms
for content packages.
What to do about this package and about this issue in general?
My gut feeling is, Fedora should refine their "code vs. content" rules,
otherwise we will soon Fedora being filled up with arbitrary
"photo/sound/video collections" disguised as "backgrounds", "sound fonts",
etc.
This is really tricky since there's essentially a continuum from
content that has no purpose in Fedora (project Gutenberg) to content
that must be in fedora (default wallpapers). Just my 0.02 EUR in the
situation, i wonder if it is a good idea to start up a third party
repo, like the Repo-He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named that provides everything
that's questionable from a purpose perspective.
Yes, this idea also had come to my mind. The more I think about it, the
more I like it.
However, I am having doubts if this would be practical and if it would
have a long term perpective.
Actually I'd expect such a repository to either starve out soon or to
evolve into a huge Fedora "-media", "-tube", "-tunes", "-flickr" or similar.
This could include
packaging all the bits found in {gnome,kde}-look and similar sites.
Then we can judge by how popular it is, and how the situation
develops, how critical and necessary it is for Fedora's greater
Purpose.
One problem would remain on Fedora's side: Where to draw the line
between "contents allowed in Fedora" and "content not allowed in Fedora"?
Ralf
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
