OMG! I've started a war! - Was:Prelink success story :)

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:10:53 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:

> I can't speak for Dag or anybody else but I'm reading between the lines
> that he (and others) are interested in Fedora Extras which fedora.us is
> supposed to become/be merged with, and wants to discuss these things so
> that the official Fedora Extras can get rid of some of the issues that
> have kept him and other individual repository maintainers away from
> contributing to fedora.us.

I agree with the first half of that long sentence, but not with the second
half.
 
> So please lets not get into the painful and tiresome fedora.us vs
> individual-repositories flamewars again but at least *try* to have a
> decent discussion what Fedora Extras rules should be, since the current
> fedora.us policies are more than obviously driving various people away
> from it.

But when I've asked before what set of rules would be "better", there has
been silence as response. Obviously, some packagers would contribute only

 * if they had access to the build system,
 * could release whenever they like,
 * could perform version upgrades whenever they like,
 * and if they did not depend on other people to
   review/approve their "work".

And with that we're back at the general fedora.us policy debate, because
it has been found that the average package needs some work before it is
considered ready. And that has been true for some packages adapted from
3rd party repositories, too. (At fedora.us, a package with incomplete
build requirements will either fail in the build system or build with an
incomplete set of features, so "smart'n'lazy" building of binary rpms
doesn't work.)

> Having the kind of people who can maintain dozens or hundreds
> of packages themselves (like the individual repository maintainers now
> do) on board instead of everybody ignoring and denying each others
> existence would be an asset, not a bad thing.

No, but it is far from a realistic vision, and we haven't had any
discussions that give reason to believe otherwise. Come on, buildroot
and epoch are no blockers, are they?

> The thing we should get rid of is the repackaging of same basic stuff
> (as in "everybody uses") over and over again.

"We should" is easy to say. I've said a similar thing about duplication
of efforts a long time ago. The question is how to achieve it?

--