Re: "Staying close to upstream"
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 08:25:46PM -0700, Matt McCutchen wrote:
I am aware of that. But FESCo has the authority to override the
maintainer, and in their recent discussion of the SELinux patch, they
decided not to move forward on the basis of the trademarks:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-08-03/fesco.2010-08...
Maybe the maintenance burden alone would also be enough to block further
consideration of the patch, but there is no way to tell that from their
discussion.
We have the authority to do that, and the decision you're referring to
effectively *did* override the maintainer by saying that the selinux
policy change should be reverted. If a package is generally
well-maintained and then broken by a change introduced by another
maintainer, there has to be a very strong argument to do anything other
than revert the change that broke things in the first place.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59(a)srcf.ucam.org