Package requests wishlist - pine

[Rex Dieter]

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:43:00 -0500 (CDT), Rex Dieter
> <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
>>
>>Note that this is intended for Extras, *not* Core.  By "Fedora", if you
>>meant "Fedora Core", then I'd agree with you 100%.
> 
> 
> I think you make too fine a distinction between Core and Extras,
> especially in this case, where the licensing issue directly impacts
> the ability of a package maintainer to do the right thing when it
...
>  I think the best way to look at Fedora Extras as an extention of Core
> not as something distinctly different moving forward. Extras is not
> and will not be a dumping ground for unmaintainable packages.

I respectfully disagree a bit here.  I have no problem as package 
maintainer waiting for bugs to be fixed upstream, and that this waiting 
does not make the package "unmaintainable".

OTOH, I guess it all boils down to fedora.redhat.com's definition of 
"open source", as referred to in point 2 on:
http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html
If pine's license doesn't meet this definition, then I would have to 
concede that pine has no place in in Fedora.

-- Rex