[Proposal] Ring-based Packaging Policies
Paul W. Frields
stickster at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 21:40:55 UTC 2015
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:05:30PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 17.02.2015 um 17:54 schrieb Mathieu Bridon:
> >Le mardi 17 février 2015 à 17:39 +0100, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> >>On 02/17/2015 05:18 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> >>>Why not to create a new repository with reduced policy as
> >>>Stephen proposed with the one-way dependency rule (between current
> >>>Fedora and the new easy-for-beginners repository)?
> >>Because this would establish a 2-class society, with double
> >>standards standards and so on.
> >>Also RH and other distros history repeatedly has told the lesson
> >>such will not fly and are doomed to fail.
> >It seems to have been working just fine in RPMFusion, where the free
> >and nonfree repositories have different standards for inclusion, and
> >where packages in nonfree can depend on packages in free, but not the
> >other way
> maybe you are newer to Fedora than me
> what you describe is what was changed around Fedora 7
> * Fedora Core: Only Redhat
> * Fedora Extras: Community
> not that i say that was bad *but* it was changed intentional
> after the distribution is now claaed jsut "Fedora"
> you can turn and name it how you like but at the end of the day it would
> mean going back to the state of Fedora Core 6
This isn't correct. The division of Core/Extras was based on who was
allowed to touch packages which isn't part of this proposal. That
wasn't a sustainable way to build community.
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
More information about the devel