[Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

[Paul W. Frields]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 04:18:00PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 04:06 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >On Thu, 2015-09-10 at 09:03 -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh at redhat.c
> >>om> wrote:
> >>>I assume that subject line got your attention.
> >>>
> >>Most definitely. :)
> >>
> >>So it's basically the same but without FPC as a gatekeeper?  Do you
> >>have any proposals for enforcement?  A periodic query of Provides
> >>(bundled-foo) and a BZ requesting a review?  Sometime projects
> >>enable unbundling over time.
> >>
> >
> >
> >I don't know that enforcement is strictly necessary. Maintainers that
> >care will self-enforce. Maintainers that don't care won't be aided by
> >this.
> 
> Are you talking about upstream maintainers of fedora maintainers?

I took this to mean Fedora maintainers, not upstream, but on second
read it seems equally true in both cases.

> The cause of the majority of cases of bundling is upstream maintainers who
> violently refuse to comprehend the evilness of bundling and who use bundling
> because "it's so convenient" to them.

Use of terms like "violent" and "evil" belies an attitude toward
upstream developers that I don't believe helps either upstream or
Fedora.

> >"Enforcement" implies adding more heavy process, which is part of the
> >problem this is trying to avoid.
> You don't seem to be aware about the fact FPC already tries to enforce
> unbundling. Yes, this is a heavy and time-consuming process, esp. on
> occasions upstream's behave stubborn and refuse to listen.

I doubt OP is unaware of this.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com