F7 Zope package

Josh Boyer jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org
Tue May 8 20:58:07 UTC 2007

On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 02:00 +0530, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote:
> > Except it already went to FESCo.  Trying to undo the decision by just
> > submitting a package and hoping it passes review likely isn't the best
> > way to go about things.
> Arguments like this will neither solve the problem, nor take this
> decision any further. All that people (not some 'single user') are
> asking is FESCo explain why they took this decision, not keep
> repeating things like "it is too difficult and painful", "read the
> release notes on the Wiki", etc.. Those are neither reasons nor
> explanations.

The decision making process, in it's entirety, is in the meeting minutes
on the wiki.  At that time, there did not seem to be a willing
maintainer for it.

> Given the fact that Python 2.4 has been around for so long and that it
> had generated only 12 bug reports for FC6, I do not see how providing
> a compat-python package is so big a problem. I do not see how a
> /usr/bin/python2.4 will cause such a huge number of confusing bug
> reports, since a newbie (who does not know about python &
> compat-python) will simply use 'python' and not hunt for 'python24' in
> the distribution in the first place.

Then why don't you package up a compat-python24 and volunteer to
maintain it?  Email FESCo saying you'd like to be the maintainer of this
package.  Having an _active_ and _willing_ maintainer may influence
FESCo to revisit the issue.  There is absolutely nothing that says a
decision is carved in stone for all eternity.

If it's not important enough for anyone to step up and do the work, then
further discussion is pointless.

Now personally, all I've seen so far is a bunch of people who really
like Zope and are really vocal about it but haven't actually done
anything other than whine about a decision what was made a month ago.
If Zope is so damn important, why hasn't someone created the needed
package already and posted a link to it?  The collective amount of time
that has been wasted on this thread could have resulted in about 4
different solutions being implemented for FESCo to actually look at.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list