On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 8:44 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 08:45:37AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> One additional point I forgot to address: the initial concern was that
> the KDE SIG would be implicitly responsible for maintaining these
> packages if they are included in the main repository. From a purely
> technical perspective, I think that we should state clearly that the
> KDE SIG would be required only to provide advance notice of major
> changes but would NOT be responsible for ensuring that these packages
> adapt to them. Of course, communicating that to users is harder (and
> they'll naturally report bugs to the wrong place in many cases), but I
> think the KDE SIG is completely permitted to refuse and retarget any
> issues that come up to the appropriate group.
>
>
> > My proposal for consideration is this:
> > "FESCo will allow these packages in the main Fedora repositories,
> > however they may not be included by default on any release-blocking
> > deliverable (ISO, image, etc.)"
I think we should reword this proposal to address this point:
"FESCo will allow these packages in the main Fedora repositories,
however they may not be included by default on any release-blocking
deliverable (ISO, image, etc.). The KDE SIG should provide a notice
before major changes, but is NOT responsible for ensuring that these
packages adapt."
I can absolutely support that.