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

Re: further package removals/potential package removals

On Saturday 22 January 2005 23:36, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Sean Middleditch <elanthis awesomeplay com> said:
> > So install it from Extras.  It's preclusion from Core will not cause a
> > retroactive obliteration of every copy of joe in the known world, nor
> > hinder you in the least from installing it whenever you want from
> > Extras.
> >
> > Why is this not getting through to people?  Is "extras" a synonym for
> > "/dev/null" in half the world or something?  ;-)
> Just because _you_ don't think it should be in Core doesn't mean that it
> in fact should be removed.  Why do you think you get to dictate what
> gets moved to Extras and anyone that disagrees with you is wrong?
> To quote from the Fedora website:
>    Objectives of Fedora Core:
>    1. Create a complete general-purpose operating system with
>       capabilities equivalent to competing operating systems, built for
>       and by a community -- those who not only consume, but also produce
>       for the good of other community members.
>    ...
>    8. Include a range of popular packages, beyond those included in Red
>       Hat's commercially supported products. (Limited, of course, to
>       packages that Red Hat can legally provide; also limited to quality
>       packages as defined by our standards.)
> These are objectives of Fedora _Core_, not Fedora Extras.
> Do "competing operating systems" include joe?  I would say yes; joe has
> been included in most Linux distributions for years.  If you install the
> Solaris 9 "Sun Freeware" collection, you get joe.
> Is it a popular package?  It sounds like it.
> Is it already included in Red Hat's commecially support products?  It is
> in RHEL 3.
> In any case, until Fedora Extras fully materializes, I think it is a
> moot point.  I would like to see a release with FC and FE released at
> the same time (with FE being based on the current "pre-Extras") and FE
> fully operational _before_ packages start migrating from Core to Extras.
> We need to see how well FE really works before pushing a bunch of
> packages out of FC.  I think we also need anaconda to handle installing
> from FE ISOs during install to make things as seamless as possible.

Agree!  Agree!

With all of this discussion of moving packages from Core to Extras, I thought 
I better take another look at Extras (last time I looked, Extras for FC3 was 
empty).  So there is now an Extras for FC3 ... BUT where are the 
corresponding SRPMS??!!

Let me go further and say that if Fedora Extras is to be the "partner" of 
Fedora Core, then it should be on the same mirrors as Fedora Core.  I am not 
sure what a good structure should be but the Fedora directory tree should 
inlcude a Core branch and an Extras branch.

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