Warren's Package Naming Proposal - Revision 2

[Dag Wieers]

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Warren Togami wrote:

> I would assert that the alliances of 3rd party repositories 
> that have tried to form in the recent past are not sustainable in the 
> long term, for the same controversial reasons that fedora.us rejected 
> cooperation with those entities earlier this year.

Rejected cooperation ? Excuse me ? When did that happen ;)

What controversial reasons ? It's funny, I remember you begging some 3rd 
party packagers to join (the old) Fedora and the 3rd party packagers 
you're refering to refused because of how (the old) Fedora was ran.

Let me say clearly that I consider the old Fedora and the new Fedora two 
different things and I'm ready to work together with the new Fedora for 
a lot of the packages I build (hopefully those that are endorsed by the 
original developers, like distcc, nagios, avidemux, tvtime, conglomerate, 
sodipodi, dovecot, amavisd-new, glabels, gringotts, rhythmbox, squidguard, 
workrave, ... ). 


> More cooperation is needed to build an entity and software base like 
> Debian, what we want to become. (?)

Well, your false statement in the naming proposal doesn't really help and 
has offended some people already.

Kind regards,
--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]