ATrpms and FC5/RHEL5
Michael A. Peters
mpeters at mac.com
Tue Jan 3 21:55:28 UTC 2006
On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 02:10 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> There is no anti 3 party repository stance in the sense that there is
> nothing in the formal Fedora repositories working actively against them.
> If there are bugs in any of the packages within core they should fixed
> regardless of the 3rd party repositories which may have helped uncovered
> the problem. In other words they are just routine bugs addressed in
> bugzilla. No big board of (anti) cooperation required.
There have been cases where Extras has used a different naming scheme
than the third parties - I'm not sure how many though.
The extras review process is open though, and I don't know that it was
ever done despite requests from the third parties against it. Nor do I
think Extras should be obligated to follow third party naming schemes,
not if doing so would violate the explicit extras naming scheme.
More information about the fedora-devel-list