On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:35:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Michael Schwendt schrieb:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 07:08:36 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> For those of you that are not on fedora-advisory-board find attached a
>> discussion with Michael Schwendt on that list that IMHO falls in the
>> area of the Packaging Committee. Could you guys please handle that? tia!
>>
>> If the Committee thinks some parts of this discussion is the area of the
>> FESCo please notify me or that the PC members that are part of FESCo
>> bring it over to FESCo. Also please try to get Michael involved into
>> this discussion -- he seems to be interested in this so he's probably
>> one of the best people to find a solution for the issue.
>
>> But I don't think there is anything to do for FESCo *before* there are
>> general packaging rules in the guidelines that clarify when Conflicts
>> are allowed/acceptable and when not (for both Core and Extras). Further:
>> Extras is no second class citizen -- if Core packages are allowed to
>> conflict with other parts of Core then Extras packages should IMHO be
>> allowed to Conflict with packages of Core, too. Sure, that should be
>> controlled and I think FESCo in the future should approve each Conflict
>> before it hits the repo.
> If you had added these extra paragraphs to the original thread on f-a-b
> list, I would have commented it with:
> "Why can't FESCO simply decide whether they want Fedora Extras
> to be free of package conflicts or not?"
We *should* not "simply decide" without evaluating first if there are
valid reasons for conflicts.
No, such "evaluation" is off-topic for this list.
You're trying to complicate matters.
Perhaps based on a misunderstanding of what types of conflicts are "in the
wild". For a moment, just forget your corner-cases I've commented on
before.
All we have until now is this discussion --
we don't have rules or guidelines when conflicts are acceptable and when
not.
And I don't see any reasons why those rules or guidelines need to be
different between Core and Extras, and thus it's IMHO business for the
packaging committee. If Spot/the Committee clearly says "No, that's not
our area of work" then I'll consider it a task for FESCo again.
> Or rephrased:
> "Does FESCO want a full install of Fedora Extras and Core to be
> possible or not?"
Well, Core has conflicts with other core packages afaik. So the above
will never work afaics, with or without Extras.
Is that true?
The stuff I'm interested in first is "Conflicts: foo" which actually
prevent multiple packages to be installed at once. Such conflicts do exist
in Fedora Extras and asks for steering.
A simple decision without any need to argue about it.