What do we think of this?

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 28.03.2007 12:46, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 27.03.2007 19:47, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> Surely it's not in the interests of the 3rd party repos to contribute to 
>>> Fedora breakage.  Right?
>>> Is it *theroetically* possible to have a set of standards that unofficial 
>>> repos could follow to be less likely to break us?  And if so, what 
>>> prevents those standards from being created, and met?
>>> Maybe these are stupid questions -- but I like putting stupid questions on 
>>> the record.
>> /me put his 3rd party repo hat on
>> Hopefully the 3rd party stuff should get better soon with a potential
>> merge of some 3rd party repos (which got already mentioned in a board
>> meeting afaik).
> I believe it was but I dont think I was in that meeting.

I'm quite sure it was once on IRC during a meeting some weeks ago that
someone else involved in the effort informed to board about the
happenings (I think it got mentioned on this list, too).

> Can you provide 
> more details on the merger? If it was discussed anywhere else pointers 
> would be just fine.

Google finds pointers if you use the the proper wording. But no, I can't
provide any more details regarding the repo merge ATM, as the plan
was/is to not announce it when the rough plan how to actually do it was
worked out. Sorry -- I disagree with that, but it's not my decision alone.

CU
thl