Re: packages without internet source in fedora

[seth vidal <skvidal fedoraproject org>]

On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 22:00 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> The issue of upstream disappearing is somewhat common (some examples in
> mind, former vixie-cron, dos2unix, libnet), maybe we could have a policy 
> about it. There are also some packages fedora is upstream for, covered in
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#head-413e1c297803cfa9de0cc4c56f3ac384bff5dc9e
> and some that are not really packages, like redhat-rpm-config.
> 
> I think that we really should avoid having any package packaged in a
> srpm only (which is the case for package with missing upstream and
> packages fedora is upstream for), and try to use systematically version
> control system for the packages fedora is upstream for, even packages
> that are not really independent packages, like redhat-rpm-config.
> 
> I think that the 2 cases should be handled differently:
> 
> * fedora specific: on https://fedorahosted.org/
> 
> * missing upstream: I think that fedorahosted is not right, a distro
>   neutral place should in my opinion be better. I also think that it
>   should be coordinated with other distros. In my opinion discussing
>   about it on the new distributions list and announcing on that list 
>   should be interesting. And once things are settled, I think that there
>   should be an obligation for the fedora maintainers to use that new 
>   hosting (or another, but this one would be the classical one).
> 
> What do you think?

distro-neutral is reasonable but may be complicated for someone to
provide. What if the name for the project was distro-neutral but if we
were actually hosting the service in fedora infrastructure? I'm not
offering this as something we WILL do - just wondering how you would
feel about it.

-sv