half baked idea for further baking: "fedora-ugly" repo
mattdm at fedoraproject.org
Sun Feb 9 17:08:43 UTC 2014
On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 01:18:25PM +0100, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> > - it could feed from COPRs -- add your packages by checking a box
> > - packages would only go in if they meet minimal automatic gating --
> > can't conflict with other packages
> How about updates for packages in given Fedora release? I'd say no
> because that easily breaks integration/other parts. That's what copr is for.
Yes, that makes sense to me too. In fact, I thought that that was in my
original mail, but I see that it is not. I am a very tired person right now.
> > - Fedora packaging guidelines don't apply fully, but maybe some subset
> > is appropriate?
> Basic licensing should apply, but most likely I'd ignore bundling stuff
> because that's often going to be main reason for being in this repo.
Yep. Exact rules to be worked out. (Possibly known bundling needs to be
registered somewhere, but again wanting to strike a balance where this
doesn't require a lot of paperwork.)
> I'd say people would be expected to work on integration but there's no
> I mentioned this during the talk, but basically I think adopting
> "Incubator" name and generic process from Apache project and
> Eclipse. It's well know terminology in OSS world IMO.
And in line with what you said about spins that aspire to be products, too.
[some stuff snipped]
> > - signing could be automatic rather than manual
> Not sure about this one...probably not.
We don't have the infrastructure to do this right now -- it certainly
couldn't be signed with the main Fedora key in the way packages are signed
now. But other than protection of the private key, the current system does
not really give us strong advantages over automatic signing. (As I
understand it, there's no careful human verification of package provenance
anyway.) So maybe something could be developed.
Matthew Miller -- Fedora Project -- <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
More information about the env-and-stacks