How to handle upstreams with bundled libs (Was Re: December 2010 Fedora Election Plan)

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 07:50:15PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 
> 1) We have the
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code
> rules in the Packaging Guidelines for a reason. A party interested in
> seeing a package in Fedora proper could work towards stripping out the
> bundling requirement in the source tarball, then package that up as
> described above. Naturally, any changes made to accomplish this should
> be submitted back upstream in order to improve the product for everyone.
> 
Just informational:
The Guidelines you're quoting deal with modifying source due to things we're
not allowed legally to ship and would still apply to anything on
repos.fp.o.

You probably want:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries

> 2) In the cases where this is completely impossible without extensive
> upstream work, we should rewrite the rules around the use of
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedorapeople_Repos repositories to allow
> such packages in an unofficial capacity. Right now, they require an
> agreement that all packages being hosted meets with Fedora Packaging
> Guidelines in full, but I suspect that the Board could consider reducing
> this restriction to "In compliance with Fedora Legal guidelines"
> instead. So we could at least have a central semi-official repository
> where these packages could be made available to those who need them
> (separate from Fedora and unsigned so those using them *know* they're
> not official or fully-supported) while efforts are made to bring the
> project into full compliance, at which time it should become an official
> package.
> 
> 
> For the record, I *am* running for a seat on FESCo, and I'd be willing
> to back this proposal up.
> 
> - -- 
> Stephen Gallagher
> RHCE 804006346421761
> 
> Delivering value year after year.
> Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
> http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAkzKDDcACgkQeiVVYja6o6NSGgCePnp7cWCNxg9OZsYta5jYbQle
> sIUAn2amRwUWOBCW7jb/H3Z/OhJgtily
> =kDwH
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> advisory-board mailing list
> advisory-board at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20101029/245a7aea/attachment.bin