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

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Thu, 2015-09-10 at 12:39 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > > > "MM" == Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org> writes:
> 
> MM> That said, I do recognize that "provides high-quality packages"
> has
> MM> also always been an underlying Fedora value even if unstated.
> But, I
> MM> think that _that_ value should be in support of the Big Four,
> and in
> MM> support of our mission in general, not a sacred beast for its own
> MM> sake.
> 
> Well, for the FPC, high quality packaging is pretty much our only
> mission.  I'm trying to avoid veering off into hyperbole here, but
> if we
> can't be focused on our specific mission then that kind of
> complicates
> our job.
> 
> But if FESCo or the board or whoever wants to say that we no longer
> really care about bundling, then FPC will stop caring.  Right now
> we've
> been told to care about bundling and so we developed all of this
> process
> and rules to implement that directive.
> 


Right, so that's basically the point of this thread. It's time to
decide if we as the Fedora Community still care enough to go through
all that process. I didn't want to just have one group (FESCo)
deciding something of that import without bringing it to the community
for discussion first.

Also, please understand that this isn't an indictment of the work you
did. Under the mission you were given, you came up with a set of
policies that generally worked. It's just time to figure out if we
still need them.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150910/41308b8a/attachment.sig>