[Bug 498194] Review Request: zarafa - Zarafa Outlook Sharing and Open Source Collaboration

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498194





--- Comment #18 from Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip at kanarip.com>  2009-11-08 16:47:28 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> (In reply to comment #16)
> > I agree with what you're saying here, but all of these are separate components
> > to the Zarafa architecture, and can be installed on separate servers.
> 
> We need to think about whether it will be done that way, not whether it can be
> done. Even for the rare cases where an admin will be splitting out parts of the
> services he will probably not mind installing the bundle but using only part of
> it.
> 

Well then have you got some arguments for or against what I've put in c#13? It
makes no sense to me to go all philosophical on the issue. It's more efficient
to address the facts, especially since -like I said- upstream likes the
concept.

> > This is going upstream, yes ;-)  
> 
> Well, the argument above was "Upstream packaging is doing something not really
> Fedoraish, but since it's upstream let's adopt Fedora's package to do the same"
> which we should not do as we only follow upstream on the code level and
> hopefully know better how to package bits for Fedora.
> 
> So the decision on granularity of package should remain a distribution's
> choice, and if upstream has decided to package up differently, then how is this
> "going upstream"?  

This argument makes no sense to me.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.