Aggregation upstream projects are BAD (kdesdk for example)

Michel Salim michel.sylvan at
Sun Sep 9 13:18:13 UTC 2007

On 08/09/2007, Till Maas <opensource at> wrote:
> On Sa September 8 2007, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > As it currently stands umbrello is just plain unfindable to end users, as
> > you know I'm not some noob. I even searched for in progress reviews of
> > umbrello.
> >
> > Also I think it is a very bad idea to ship packages with a clearly seperate
> > upstream in some kinda bundle form. Sticking with the umbrello example, in
> > order for the latest version to be included into Fedora, we must wait for a
> > new upstream kdesdk release, which likely won't happen before there is a
> > kdesdk4 in some far away future, as kde3 is as good as EOL.
> >
> > Notice that umbrello and kdesdk are just an example, this goes for other
> > Aggregation upstreams too.
> >
> > Since on of Fedora's strenghts is being always up to date with the latest
> > upstream versions, I think using these kind of upstream aggregation
> > projects is a BAD idea as it creates interlocks with regards to versions
> > between clearly seperate projects like kdesdk and umbrello.
> I agree completely.
Ditto, though in this case, umbrello happens to *also* be part of kdesdk:

The source tarballs are taken straight out of kdesdk CVS, so the
Fedora packaging, while needing to be fixed, is understandable.

By the way, 'yum search umbrello' won't work with just a Provides:,
and so yum install probably would not either:

So a stopgap fix might not work, until the package is properly split.



More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list