That ole Livna Problem/That ole VLC Problem

[Les Mikesell]

Michael Schwendt wrote:

>>> The burden
>>> of avoiding repository compatibility problems is on the 3rd party
>>> packagers' shoulders.
>> I'd call this a recipe for disaster,
> 
> You misunderstood. It's not a recipe, it's the situation we're still in.

You say 'still' as though you think the situation could change.

>>  > Unless you manage to get Fedora packagers to
>>> monitor 3rd party repositories, some of which they may not even have
>>> heard of before.
>> Exactly, and that just doesn't happen.  Is it just that I know more
>> about the RPM situation or is this better organized over in the .deb world?
> 
> Debian and Ubuntu try to offer "everything" in their official repos.
> Still there are so many unofficial repos, I have doubts they all work
> together always. It's very likely that some of them are even mutually
> exclusive, e.g. see a long list at:  http://www.apt-get.org/main.php

It is the fedora policy of not permitting certain needed things into an 
officially cooperating repository that sets up the problem - and I don't 
see how that is going to change.  Or you could say it the other way 
around as the fedora packagers not cooperating with the repositories 
that do provide certain needed packages. You get the same predictable 
result either way you look at it.  Perhaps the .deb maintainers 
recognized the issue that their strict policy on the 'free' repository 
would cause if they did not cooperate with a more-or-less official 
non-free repo.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com