Summary of the 2008-03-11 Packaging Committee meeting

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:17:48 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:

> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 17:05 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> 
> > Ah, come on, this has nothing to do with disrespect. We already strip
> > upstream tarballs and exclude certain stuff from it, because only parts of
> > a product are compatible with our project policies. We disable features,
> > we patch some things completely. 
> 
> (The term for those things is "fork")

Technically, maybe, maybe not. Usually, real forks are not created at the
package-level, but at the project level, i.e. they get a new upstream
location and are actively developed [into a different direction than their
original code base]. On the contrary, I don't think anyone really
considers an upstream tarball, which is stripped off of mp3 codecs at the
source-level or patched to use ABC instead of XYZ, a "fork". Still, it's
an example of upstream products, which are not accepted in Fedora
unmodified. If choosing a readable package name is considered as
disrespectful, stripping and patching source tarballs is, too.