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

Re: up2date development



On Wed, 2004-10-13 at 20:54 +1000, Alan Milligan wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Sorry, I should have started this in a separate thread to begin with, so
> please bear with me for continuing here.
> 
> As stated earlier, we have a firm agenda to ensure up2date remains both
> that current with Python and a generalised rpm gui tool.
> 
> As with the earlier post, I'm not too concerned about missing FC3
> cutoff, we're all committed to the long-term of Fedora.
> 
> As outlined, removing the OpenSSL package, rpclib, and other sins, is by
> no means trivial (although not that complicated either).  But it is
> certainly too complex to expect bugzilla to usefully manage the process.

It still needs to go in bugzilla whether or not design discussion is
going on else where.

> At the least, it requires coordination and discussion to agree that all
> parties interests are met - I am not interested in doing work that's not
> going to be accepted, nor in working upon out of date, irrelevant
> images, or difficult back-ports.

I can understand that.  fedora-devel may be a bit high traffic for this.
It might be worth punting off rhn-users, but that's not quite right.
Maybe it'd be worth having a seperate list.

> Can I please be put in touch with the affected RH people (on or off the
> list), so we can decide upon a manner to proceed, somewhat in the vane
> of other open projects we all know and love?

rpm --changelog is your friend:

alikins redhat com

You probably want to pull in the current development too - current
maintainer CC'd. as they are intrested in the other end.

Paul


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