F21 Self Contained Change: Playground repository
hobbes1069 at gmail.com
Tue Apr 8 17:32:08 UTC 2014
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Ask yourself which is more important to most users:
> > 1) My OS is perfectly maintainable by engineers.
> > or
> > 2) My OS lets me install the software I need without hassle.
> > Offering users a slightly-less stringent repository such as this makes
> > sense.
> Adding repos definitely should not be taken lightly. Frankly, if 2 is
> really something worth doing, then perhaps also the (overly?) stringent
> policies need rethinking.
> I freely admit there's definitely some gray area here, and maybe another
> repo is indeed the right (ie, least-bad) approach.
I agree. I'm working on several review requests from the same developer
that "bundle" the same code across his projects (an xmlrpc implementation
so each program can talk to each other). He doesn't want to split it out
into an independent library because he doesn't want to support its use
outside of his own programs, that said I've been "working" with him to
clean it up but it's a long slow process and the software is perfectly
usable as is.
It's probably not feasible, but If there was a way to track
downloads/installs so I would know how many people are using the software
it would give me an idea if it's worth the trouble to "fix" the package to
the guidelines or leave it in this repository.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel