Packaging guidelines: IPv6

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le mercredi 05 juillet 2006 à 23:40 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org a
écrit :

> AFAIK, FE's mantra is still "upstream"
> 
> So if some software doesn't support IPv6, I fail to see why it should become 
> a burden to the packager.  Just file a bug report upstream.

...

> Now if dwmw2 wants to force all Core packages to support IPv6, that's fine 
> with me.

dwmw2 needs IPv6 for OLPC

> But I don't think mandating it for FE packages is right, nor 
> implying that FE is a dumping ground simply because it doesn't mandate enough 
> features.

There's so much material to package and so little time. You don't do FE
packagers any favour by accepting everything they propose blindly.
Sometimes providing a checklist of strongly recommended technical
features will help them choose between competing apps. And they don't
discover after months of gruelling packaging work they bet on the wrong
horse - no one's interested in foo app because bar does the same (and is
IPv6/UTF-8/x86-64/GTK-2 whatever compatible)

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20060706/6f97d91c/attachment.sig>