Fedora Extras is extra

[Chris Stark]

Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 04:11:25PM -0500, William M. Quarles wrote:
> 
>>Join us or we'll start reproducing your software in your place anyways. 
>> Does this not scream arrogance, bureacracy, and monopoly to anybody 
>>else?  Does this not seem very Microsoft-ish?  Can you actually expect 
> 
> 
> There's been a lot of discussion about this. The points the page makes are
> real, and declaring their answer "Microsoft-ish" isn't constructive. Do you
> have an alternate *solution*?
> 

I think I have to agree with Mr. Quarles on this one. I don't like the 
tone of their page. If Fedora Core is supposed to be a community 
project, there should not be a centralized QA process for "acceptible" 
packages. The community will decide what works by process of natural 
selection.

No, they shouldn't be responsible for system stability if a 3rd party 
package breaks the system. Disclaiming responsibility is fine (and 
probably the appropraite thing to do). But undermining other repos by 
using conflicting naming systems IS "Microsoft-ish" (and thus utterly 
reprehensible) and they should be ashamed of themselves.

If fedora.us wants to start including packages that are already 
available from FreshRPMs, Dag, etc., they should work with these other 
repositories' maintainers and contributors. Linux is about 
collaboration. By trying to assert dominance and control over the 
community development process, they're only going to alienate users and 
developers.

I've removed them from my repo list just out of principle.