ATrpms and FC5/RHEL5

Michael A. Peters mpeters at
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 mailing list