Name is but sound and smoke
Michael Schwendt
ms-nospam-0306 at arcor.de
Tue Nov 11 16:26:25 UTC 2003
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:58:20 -0500, Doug Stewart wrote:
> | Extras should at most depend on Core, but not on Alternatives.
>
> Okay, then, we need new nomenclature. Say I want the newest Galeon,
> which (hypothetically) doesn't support the FC-shipped Mozilla but needs
> FC-moz++ (as was the case for RedHat 9). On my RH9 boxes, I used Dag's
> galeon+mozilla packages.
>
> Now, how would you suggest handling that situation? What names would
> apply to the repositories where said packages reside?
When you need an updated core component (Mozilla) and an updated add-on
(Galeon -> Extras), I would expect such packages to be made available in
the development streams of Fedora Core and Fedora Extras.
> | As soon as you update software which is in Core or Extras, you don't play
> | well with the current scheme, and all your software would be "Testing
> | Alternatives".
> |
>
> Hmmm. Not quite right, IMHO. Maybe "Unsupported" or something like
> that?
With the quote cut like that, it might look confusing. However, Axel
referred to _upgrades_ and _rebuilds_ (probably with changed feature set)
of software in order to make new and upgraded add-ons possible. That would
at most fit into the development streams of Core/Extras/Alternatives.
It all boils down to what official updates to Core/Extras/Alt are
released. If the packages in current Fedora Core/Extras/Alt release are
not up-to-date enough, dependent new stuff can only go into development
streams or 3rd party repositories.
> Again, taking the Dag moz+gal situation, I wouldn't label them as
> "testing". If Galeon fits in to the "extras" category, but I wanted the
> updated build and needed to upgrade Mozilla (a Core package), how would
> you propose working out such a situation? Or are any users of such
> packages strictly off the RedHat Ranch?
Depends on whether you expect the community behind Fedora Extras and
Fedora Core Development to be much slower than a 3rd party repository.
--
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20031111/c51cdf21/attachment-0002.bin
More information about the users
mailing list