Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center
awilliam at redhat.com
Thu Jan 23 23:08:13 UTC 2014
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:55 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 23.01.2014 16:49, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
> > On 01/23/2014 01:48 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >> So, one possibility would be to move less-maintained packages to a separate
> >> repository tree still included as Fedora and enabled by default
> > That wont reduce the bugs reported against it...
> well, why not remove all packages so no bugs get reported at all?
> consider packages for removal because upstream does not jump around
> and release at least once per year a new version is.... hmmm... i
> must not say the words in public....
I think this discussion is going down a needlessly divisive path that it
doesn't need to at all.
The discussion is assuming we have precisely two choices:
* Rigidly and with no exceptions throw out software which meets some
arbitrary approximations for determining 'maintained or abandoned'
* Change nothing
I don't think that's true at all. Would anyone on either side of the
debate object to an approach which tried to identify software that was
truly abandoned either up- or down-stream - not just 'software that no
longer required changing' - and throw that out?
I'm sure there's at least a certain amount of low-hanging fruit that
no-one would really mind getting rid of.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
More information about the devel