Summary of the 2008-04-08 Packaging Committee meeting

Callum Lerwick seg at haxxed.com
Thu May 15 19:40:41 UTC 2008


On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 12:26 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The only parts where this matters are those where there is incompatible
> duplication within the fedora repository.  What I specifically fail to
> understand is why those packages that have been duplicated could not have
> been done in a way that the same contents would be acceptable in both
> repositories.  Why, for example, couldn't the changes you say fedora needs
> as a dependency for openoffice be included in the jpackage repository for
> that fedora release and maintained as exact copies?


Overlapping repos are fundamentally broken, period. We've had long flamewars
in the past about how ATrpms freely replaces Fedora packages making an
unsupportable mess. Why are we allowing JPackage to pull the same crap?

Fedora must not make any consessions to allowing JPackage to maintain
overlapping packages in their repos. Because it is brain damaged. Period.

This goes for all external repos, not just JPackage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080515/d5a262ef/attachment.htm>


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list