Re: Making Fedora Core CD #1 Standalone -- Core should continue but let's define a subset

[Chris Chabot <chabotc 4-ice com>]

Bryan J. Smith wrote:

> To start, let me tell you what I think, and where I am coming from.
>
> 1.  I consider Fedora Core to be Red Hat Linux
> 2.  Fedora Core will bloat to 5, 6 and more CDs
>
> As such, all the legacy needs to be in it, along with anything new.
> There is no way to avoid this, without breaking compatibility and
> assumptions.  Is it a bad thing?  That's debateable.  There is much
> good to adding more and more as part of the "full" install,
> Scribus, OpenGroupware.org (OGo), Firefox/Thunderbird, etc...
>  
This actually opens a whole new can of worms for the fedora project.. 
Most of these plans should really be split into 3 different repositories:
- Supported Core
- Support additional packages
- Unsupported additional packages

That way the core is a solid base on which to base everything else. The 
supported packages would be bugzilla'ble and would either be maintained 
by Redhat or by a trusted maintainer (who has earned this title and 
trust over time in the unsupported playground) and the unsupported would 
be a great place for well working packages that are not maintained by a 
trusted maintainer or redhat.

This way anyone can try to contribute packages (as u said, for things 
like OpenGroupWare.org, etc) and the maintainer can prove and show he 
can maintain, fix and support this contribution over time before it gets 
moved to 'officialy included'. in essence this follows the debian 
structure, packages are only included if there is a valid and trusted 
maintainer for them.

Reasoning for this is that it would be a _lot_ worse if there was a 
serious data-destroying bug or security compromising bug in a package 
that no one would fix (in a timely and correct fashion) then it would be 
to not include a package.