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

Re: Package requests wishlist - pine

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:43:00 -0500 (CDT), Rex Dieter
<rdieter math unl edu> wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Gregory Leblanc wrote:

Note that this is intended for Extras, *not* Core.  By "Fedora", if you
meant "Fedora Core", then I'd agree with you 100%.

I think you make too fine a distinction between Core and Extras,
especially in this case, where the licensing issue directly impacts
the ability of a package maintainer to do the right thing when it
 I think the best way to look at Fedora Extras as an extention of Core
not as something distinctly different moving forward. Extras is not
and will not be a dumping ground for unmaintainable packages.

I respectfully disagree a bit here. I have no problem as package maintainer waiting for bugs to be fixed upstream, and that this waiting does not make the package "unmaintainable".

OTOH, I guess it all boils down to fedora.redhat.com's definition of "open source", as referred to in point 2 on:
If pine's license doesn't meet this definition, then I would have to concede that pine has no place in in Fedora.

-- Rex

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