FESCo meeting summary for 2009-07-31

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Fri Jul 31 21:06:38 UTC 2009


On 07/31/2009 01:47 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 02:00:10AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> 
>> Even if they do want to go to this extend, we don't need to grant them
>> special exceptions. We can recommend that the projects used a proper
>> project hosting facility and leave it at that. I
> 
> This is part of the problem.  Perhaps the developers don't want to be bothered
> with setting up a project hosting facility for something they to-date have
> been releasing in a manner they find sufficient.  I don't see why they should
> be forced to just to be part of Fedora.
> 
> If we want to encourage and recommend that, great!  But saying it's required
> when they are providing sufficient means of getting the source to the package
> (in a Fedora perferred form even!) is a bit odd to me.
> 
This is not a Fedora preferred form.  Getting upstream software out of
SRPMS or .debs is more painful than getting them out of tarballs.

>> All you are doing is forcing people to list a URL. Also,
>>> if an upstream project doesn't want to host all that and wants to use the SRPM
>>> as the source, who is Fedora to tell them they can't?
>>
>> It is a random upstream project but one developed within Fedora and
>> Fedora can and should tell them not to do so. Why shouldn't we? Again
>> they don't need or deserve special exceptions. Treat them like any other
>> upstream project. That is all I ask.
> 
> No.  That is part of the problem with your proposal.  You have targetted RH
> or Fedora packages that do this.  If some other package only distributes via
> SRPM (or .deb, or ebuild), they aren't required to comply.  Why force these
> RH/Fedora packages to do something that we don't force other packages to?
> 
The proposal doesn't target Fedora or RH.  The exception targets Fedora
or Red Hat.  This removes that exception.

-Toshio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090731/b30c7fc6/attachment.sig>


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list