[Proposal] Ring-based Packaging Policies

drago01 drago01 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 16 07:11:53 UTC 2015

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh at redhat.com> wrote:
> (Logistical note: please keep all replies to this thread on
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org)
> [...]
> === Core Packages ===
> Any package that is provided on a release-blocking medium (which at
> present includes Fedora Atomic, Fedora Cloud, Fedora Server, Fedora
> Workstation, the KDE Spin and several ARM images) must comply exactly
> with the packaging guidelines as they are written today. These packages
> must receive a full package review *when they are added to the install
> media*. Any package present on the media if this proposal is adopted is
> exempted from this requirement. Any package to newly appear on the
> install media after this time *should* (I hate that word...) receive a
> new package review, even if it is already present in Fedora.
> === Ring Packages ===
> Any new package that is *not* going to be part of the install media set
> is required to pass a lighter review and is permitted to carry bundled
> libraries, with caveats to be listed below.

This is completely backwards ... what we wanted to do is to make
"package is installed by default" less important in favor of "we have
a working software installing experience just install it afterwards"
What you are doing here is to lessen the quality of the latter.

Also I am not buying that "bundles libraries" are that much of an
issue ... do you have any data to back this up? Other then chromium I
cannot think of any package that is out of fedora because of this.
Most packages just sit
in the review queue due to lack of reviewers not due to bundles libraries.

More information about the devel mailing list