Warren' rejection of cooperation with other repos

[Panu Matilainen]

On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Axel Thimm wrote:

> > On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Warren Togami wrote:
> > > I would assert that the alliances of 3rd party repositories that
> > > have tried to form in the recent past are not sustainable in the
> > > long term, for the same controversial reasons that fedora.us
> > > rejected cooperation with those entities earlier this year.
> 
> I am sorry to hear that you still think you were doing the Right
> Thing (TM).
> 
> When Fedora (US) was being formed it attracted many repo maintainers
> like freshrpms, newrpms, dag and many others including myself. They
> hoped for a coordination institution within fedora, which should
> provide
> 
> o interrepository specifications (note "inter"!!!)

Oh but that was NEVER the idea behind fedora.us. The idea was to create a 
repository run by community of packagers, not a community of repositories 
run by individuals. Why do you need 1000 different repositories if you can 
stick the packages into one? 

> o merger proposals
> o common infrastructure

Merger was always up to the individual packagers with their repositories
to submit their packages to fedora.us QA, using the common infrastructure
provided by fedora.us. Some did, others didn't. As to why, I can only
agree with Michael: people didn't/don't want to change the way they do
things, have their packages go through rigorous (and slow) QA etc. 

I find it kinda funny that people who refuse to co-operate within policies
and specifications created by the fedora.us community complain about
fedora.us not co-operating with them :-/

	- Panu -