On Wednesday 24 August 2005 19:53, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 18:12 +0200, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> > Yes, but none of those organizations or any other packager uses our
> > source rpm. Also, please note very carefully the word "probably" in the
> > above sentence -- that means, I am unsure about what I am saying or
> > undecided.
>
> Ok, but somebody (like myself) could create their own srpm from your
> source and then provide both the srpm and binary rpms built from that
> for things like Fedora Extras and CentOS Extras?
Yes, anyone can create anything from the source.
I'm not sure about the requirements for Fedora Extras and CentOS Extras.
I'm not trying to restrict anyone any more than GPL and Copyrights do, I'm
just concerned to see that Bacula will continue when I'm no longer here
(hopefully, I'm concerned about this *long* before that time ... ).
I would sure like to see Bacula in them, but I'm not prepared even to *read*
the *very* long rules that Fedora Extras has, much less run rpmlint, and all
the other stuff they want done. I'm not complaining about their requirements
because it is a very reasonable way to ensure good quality rpms, but I just
don't have the time.
--
Best regards,
Kern
(">
/\
V_V
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
