Aggregation upstream projects are BAD (kdesdk for example)

[Arthur Pemberton]

On 9/9/07, Michel Salim <michel.sylvan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/09/2007, Till Maas <opensource at till.name> 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:
>
> http://uml.sourceforge.net/download.php
>
> 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:


How about listing the apps in the description?


-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )