[Fedora-packaging] #15 relaxing guidelines wrt. bundling

Stephen Gallagher sgallagh at redhat.com
Mon Nov 1 13:27:40 UTC 2010

Hash: SHA1

On 11/01/2010 09:23 AM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 11/01/2010 06:33 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> See my post from October 29th to this list about using the FedoraPeople
>> repositories for this purpose, with the added benefit of NOT having
>> these packages signed (and therefore, official) parts of the Fedora project.
> FWIW, I support this, as my Chromium packages are in the Fedora People
> repos, and technically, in violation of the current policy.

Actually, I had a discussion with the Fedora Hosted admins about this on
Friday. We determined that Chromium is NOT in violation of the current
policy on repos. Basically, the only two rules are: must be a compatible
license and must not be on the ForbiddenItems list.

My proposal is more of a marketing formalization of this policy: that
repos can be kept unofficial, but still on a fedora*.org domain so that
we retain the mindshare (as opposed to having joesrepo.geocities.com,
for example).

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the packaging mailing list