package EOL

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at
Sat Apr 29 08:07:10 UTC 2006

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> It's way better to have a gray repo rather than putting black sheep in
> the main repo just because some packagers find them too convenient to
> drop (and are ready to accept the convenience/security compromise a
> uninformed user may not find so cool)

I disagree, one one side we already have to much repos as is, and on the
other side some repos (the repo that should not be named) really need a
a split, currently the repo that should not be named contains anything
thats non free one way or the other. But most of that stuff is fine in
the US and could / should be on a repo for which we can advertise. I
would like to see the following FE-guidelines following repos (All non
free without the Fedora name, but still in accordance with all the other
-Fedora Core
-Fedora Extras
-XXX Non commercial use (otherwise 100% free)
-XXX patent encumbered (aka non US)
-XXX Non free

Currently all XXX stuff is on the repo which should not be named whcih
is not a good thing. If we also create supported and semi supported
versions of repo's you all of a sudden have made a one dimensional
problem 2 dimensional which is a bad idea.

Either a package meets our quality standards or it doesn't its really
that simple.



More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list