Re: further package removals/potential package removals

[Stuart Children <stuart terminus co uk>]

Rex Dieter wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, Stuart Children wrote:
>
> > I see Core as "packages managed mainly by RedHat employees and 
> > essential to a base [desktop|server] system" (latter is horribly 
> > subjective I know), and Extras as "packages mainly packaged by 
> > non-RedHat employees", with the extra requirement that no package in 
> > Core should depend on a package in Extras. Both are parts of the 
> > overall distribution, but Core simply has stricter QC and inclusion 
> > requirements.
>
> (Ironic or not) since Fedora Extras (at least the fedora.us incarnation) 
> actually has QA *before* packages are published, IMO, their packaging 
> quality is at least as good or better than many of those in Core.

Yes, fair point. I certainly did not intend to mark Extras as of poorer 
quality (nor diminish all the hard work people have done at fedora.us). 
Clearly all packagers should strive to create packages of the highest 
quality - whichever repository they happen to be a part of.

My emphasis was more on who has control over packaging decisions. For 
Core, that's Red Hat employees - for Extras it's the individual package 
owner. Hopefully both would be working to the same guidelines/rules that 
the Fedora community has agreed upon. I don't think it has to be like 
that - I'm just making suggestions to try and help form definitions of 
Core and Extras.

Cheers

--
Stuart Children