Agressive FUD by Fedora contributor

[Tim Jackson]

Christopher Stone wrote:

> You should not replace core packages in your repository.  Instead you
> should file bug reports against the packages in FC/FE which you need
> to replace in order to fix them so they don't need to be replaced.  If
> there is *anybody* on this mailing list that disagrees with this
> statement, please speak up.  I doubt anyone will.

Actually, I have an issue with this, at least with the way you're 
expressing it (actually, my personal preferences and policies appear to 
be broadly aligned with yours). Indeed, what you say is probably the 
"best" solution, and promoting it is good. I don't (directly) use ATrpms 
myself, out of personal choice and for various reasons including some of 
the ones you cited.

HOWEVER,

a) Axel has contributed an awful lot to the community by providing a lot 
of useful packages; even though I don't have AT in my repos.d, I have 
found a number of his packages/specs useful over time. He is also an 
Extras contributor. Thus I don't think the strength of anti-Axel comment 
here is justified. Let's not make this personal. (NB ATrpms = Axel = 
personal)

b) I don't think that any of us have the right to dictate what someone 
does or doesn't maintain on their privately-managed website. If Axel 
wants to build packages that conflict with Fedora for whatever reason 
(right or wrong) then that's his prerogative. Nobody else has to use 
them if they don't want. If there's misunderstanding amongst users about 
the policies of that website then that's a different issue.

c) in the general sense (I am not getting into discussions of specifics 
here or whether these apply to AT or not) there are sometimes valid 
reasons for repos to override core stuff which don't fall into the 
category of "core bugs". These include amongst others:

i) personal/private situations (custom things)
ii) special interests e.g. music/realtime/embedded (e.g. PlanetCCRMA)
iii) experimentation/proof of concept/development etc.
iv) legal (of course, plugin architecture is best, but that's not
     *always* possible)

I suppose in summary I would say that there are a number of valid points 
here:

* it would be great in theory IF the overlap between AT/other repos and
   FC/FE  could be reduced. I think good progress has been made:
   personally I find that FC+FE+Livna covers most of my needs. I
   think Axel wants the same, otherwise he wouldn't be an FE contributor.
   However due to differing needs both technically, legally and
   policy-wise I don't think there will ever be a perfect situation. And
   no matter how much progress we make, if people want to run their own
   repositories with their own packages that override and conflict with
   Core, then well, that's their choice. Let the users choose whether
   they want that or not.

* it is good that users should be conscious about the sources of the
   software that they install, and understand the implications.

* if people are using repos that override core packages, it's good that
   they are clear about this and understand it.

* your comments are based on some kind of concept of "production
   systems". I think everyone understands that concept, but exactly what
   it means in practice differs between people and situations. I have
   different policies towards repo usage on my home desktop machine to my
   personal server, to my office workstation and company servers. Horses
   for courses, so to speak.

However, none of these mean that we have a right to tell people like 
Axel (or anyone else) what they should and shouldn't do with their own 
personal projects. By all means, in a spirit of co-operation, we can say 
"Please would you make it abundantly clear that your repo overrides core 
packages, and this makes it difficult for users to get support because 
they're not really running 'Fedora' any more" or "Hey, let's work 
together to get as much as possible into Core/Extras to reduce the need 
for third-party repos". But let's not dictate to people or be 
over-critical. Their life, their time, their choice. I'm pretty sure 
we're all on the same side here and we want to encourage people to get 
involved and work towards a common goal, not drive them away.


Tim