2015-08-12 9:14 GMT-06:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:11:39PM -0400, Gary Gatling wrote:
> > I realize we have our guidelines and we're not Debian, Suse or Ubuntu...
> > and that's a good thing. But, if we're making exceptions for Firefox
> > because of it's popularity shouldn't we do the same for Chromium.
> I agree with Gerald. If there are exceptions for firefox due to popularity
> then chromium deserves the same bundling exceptions. Otherwise we are not
> being fair.
It's important to note that "popularity" is not the sole reason for
exceptions for Firefox. Overall, everyone should review the existing
discussion in the guidelines about bundling exceptions and consider how
this might fit in (possibly including revisions if they make sense):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Some_reasons_you_might_be_granted_an_exception
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Forks_of_packages_which_have_been_granted_an_exception
Here say:
"firefox has a temporary bundling exception since it has an active security team tracking issues in their codebase. icecat has a temporary exception since it is a fork of firefox that closely tracks firefox's changes. We'll re-evaluate this before F22."
"firefox has a temporary bundling exception since it has an active security team tracking issues in their codebase. icecat has a temporary exception since it is a fork of firefox that closely tracks firefox's changes. We'll re-evaluate this before F22."
Maybe will be a good time to look at Chromium too
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
