[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: New package: cogito



On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 18:41 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > (On fedora.us there was
> > unstable and testing.)
> 
> ... and confused many users, since (1) no document explained the
> philosophy behind a classification into stable/testing/unstable, (2) other
> repositories use a different classification, (3) hardly any user who, runs
> into problems with packages from "testing" or "unstable", would report a
> bug, (4) repository mixing becomes even funnier, (5) inter-repository
> dependencies (e.g. "livna") get more funny, too, (6) example yum config
> files apparently suggested to enable all repositories by default, and (7)
> an upgrade path from half-baked packages/software often is impracticable.
> 
> > I'm not sure if the new testing repository is more
> > like the Fedora Core Testing repo....
> 
> It is and should not be abused for overly experimental stuff.
>  
I'll accept all this as for the good.

But reiterate the part you snipped: there's all sorts of broken but
actively developed, dependency-inducing software that people will want
to package.  There is not currently any policy of exclusion for such
software.  Unless that changes, at some point there has to be some
policy of how to minimize breakage when including it.

-Toshio
-- 
toshio \ Questions for the            Would Morticia wear it?
 @tiki- \ 21st Century!               Would it look better on me?
 lounge.com=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
                                                                GA->ME 1999

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]