[fab] JBJ considered harmfull

[Rex Dieter]

seth vidal wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 07:17 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:

>> And, from a *technical* point of view, I see no reason to fork either. 
>> The only technical arguments I've heard so far are things like "feature 
>> X is crazy!", but from my reading of:
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/rpm-devel
>> Most/all of those "feature X's" are optional and/or can be disabled if 
>> need-be.
> 
> Have you seen the rpmtag_arch removals from last week and the rpmrc
> movement?
...
> it's the foundation for everything we do.

Unfortunately, you're speaking mostly Greek to me here.  If you expect 
me (and others) to be able to make an informed judgment, you'll need to 
expand on how this shakes our foundations so much.

Further, since it *is* such an important item, I'm sure someone (Paul, 
you?) has mentioned your reservations about this on rpm-devel, right? 
Rhetorical question only, for a point, because I just checked, and no 
one has.  As a matter of fact, the only feedback regarding this on 
rpm-devel that I see (so far) has been positive.

> We're not going to be able to merge those soon from what I can see.
...
> we have already forked it. We just need to own up to our fork.

All I see is us (fedora) lagging *far* behind (version-wise) with only 
selected back-ported features and bugfixes.  Of course merging with 
upstream would be painful at this point, but I see that mostly as a 
problem of our own making.

-- Rex