[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Warren' rejection of cooperation with other repos

On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

> Le sam 08/11/2003 à 17:59, Jesse Keating a écrit :
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > On Saturday 08 November 2003 04:09, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > I am sorry to hear that you still think you were doing the Right
> > > Thing (TM).
> > >
> > > When Fedora (US) was being formed it attracted many repo maintainers
> > > like freshrpms, newrpms, dag and many others including myself. They
> > > hoped for a coordination institution within fedora, which should
> > > provide
> > 
> > So it would seem that you're going to discount Warren's package naming 
> > scheme, mearly because there is bad blood between him and some other 
> > package repots?  Great... thats nice.
> Nobody wrote so here. Quite the contrary - a lot of people are/were
> expecting to do a new start with the new fedora and forget old history.
> And that means working out something were multiple repositories can
> coexist peacefully.
> Answers like "there is no need for 3rd party repositories" do not help
> at all.

I assume that's got to do with my "why you need 1000 repositories" comment
- sure, 3rd party repositories will always exist and are needed, things
like a special repos of kernel, jpackake etc for those special interest
groups are quite a different matter. What I meant by the "1000 repos"  
comment is that it's just plain silly and waste of time that the same
pieces of software which basically everybody uses are
re-re-re-re-re-repackaged in various repositories just because people
can't agree on some policies.

And now I'm out of this political crap and back to doing something 
hopefully remotely usefull :)

	- Panu -

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]