[fab] Re: openmotif

[Rahul]

Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 15:47 +0530, Rahul wrote:
>> Paul W. Frields wrote:
>>
>>> Frankly, I'm a little surprised, after our previous discussions on
>>> whether we should pursue FSF endorsement in some fashion, that we would
>>> wring our hands much about this.  We've agreed that openmotif is not
>>> free.  Fedora only ships free software.  Rahul, you have said this to
>>> many people, many times.  
>> Yes but I have also been telling many people that we should do things in 
>> a way that doesnt affect end users and our contributors.  Pretty much 
>> all of the openmotif dependencies in Fedora Core and Extras can be fixed 
>> with lesstif.  #3 is disruptive. #1 doesnt make much sense to me since 
>> we havent included libraries in Fedora Core unless we had actual 
>> applications in Fedora Core dependent on them. 
> 
> I agree that #1 makes no sense.
> 
>> Since there is already support to move all the openmotif dependencies
>> into Fedora Extras, I dont see why we need to retain openmotif in
>> Fedora Core.
> 
> This part I agree with. :-)  I think that in this case moving the apps
> and libs dependent on openmotif to Extras makes sense, which would allow
> them to join the Extras "rolling release" structure. 

Exactly. Does this not make sense to anyone else?


  Thus, when they're
> fixed, people would be able to upgrade.  So you have one of two
> situations AIUI, and not being a programmer type, I would appreciate
> corrections where I'm wrong:
> 
> 1.  User has openmotif [+ dependent packages] installed, and upgrades to
> FC6.  The openmotif package stays installed as is, and the dependent
> packages will pull in lesstif once they are rebuilt and repushed to FE.
> It's up to the user to remove openmotif unless we obsolete it with
> lesstif, which seems risky.

Lesstif package will automatically obsolete openmotif or install in 
parallel if possible.

See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202527 for the 
obsoletes  and 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203993 for the RFE 
to make openmotif parallely installable.


> 
> 2.  User has openmotif [+ dependent packages] installed, and installs
> FC6, expecting to find these packages again during or after
> installation, and doesn't.  This causes grumbling.  User drops back to
> FC5 until he figures out the situation by looking at release notes, FAQ,
> or ML, and then chooses to either stay with FC5 until we have lesstif
> replacements for his favorite packages, or he gets openmotif on his own
> and takes the plunge to FC6.

FC6 has Fedora Extras repository support. So the outcome depends on 
whether the user chooses to use this or not.


> 
> Neither of these situations prevents a third-party repository from
> picking up openmotif if they're interested, right?
> 
>> We moved GNOME 1.x libs to Fedora Extras soon after GNUCash got into
>> the GTK 2.x bandwagon.  The current situation isnt very different.
> 
> Of course it's different.  GNOME 1.x libraries are free software by
> every definition that matters, while openmotif is not.  Leaving
> openmotif in Fedora (no matter where one puts it) and continuing to talk
> about freedom is just hypocritical.

The only reason for openmotif not being dropped immediately is not break 
applications and since we agreed to move openmotif dependencies to 
Fedora Extras, I am arguing that we move openmotif too over till we fix 
everything to work with lesstif.  Everyone knows that openmotif needs to 
be dropped long term.  No hypocrisy there.

Rahul