Re: [fab] FSF Requirements for srpm provisions

[Josh Boyer <jwboyer jdub homelinux org>]

On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 15:44 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thursday 02 November 2006 11:32, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > I'd prefer they have their own SRPMS, especially if they had to pull
> > anything from -devel (which will get obsoleted from the download
> > site soon.)
> >
> > Now, if they just want one big source ISO, that's fine.
> 
> What about the Fedora project case going forward?  A spin of Fedora being of 
> both Core and Extras packages, user chosen (or in some cases project chosen) 
> package set.  Does EACH spin have to ship the SRPMS used, or can all refer 
> back to the SRPM pool at fedoraproject.org and its mirrors?

If you hose those off of fedoraproject.org (thereby making them official
Fedora projects) then the problem would be solved.

josh