Do we need split media CDs for F12?

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:37 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> 
> Dear Jesse,
> 
> you yourself do not accept patches beyond what you then, at that moment,
> think are applicable use-cases of Fedora Project Release Engineering only
> to work something up yourself two weeks later.

Yes, if I didn't like the patch, or how it was done, I didn't accept it.
Just like any other upstream.  Did I use your exact code when I did it
myself two weeks later?  Probably not.

> 
> We've also seen upstream reject very reasonable patches -that were in the
> upstream repo already, authored by @redhat.com of course- be cherry-picked
> to another branch for whatever reason I've offered to help with (some QA
> concerns for one).

And they're well within their right, as an upstream project, to reject
such things.  Just because the patch works great on one branch doesn't
mean it'll work the same on another.  They are the ones to decide that.
This is how opensource development works.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090616/f8de1d8d/attachment.bin