On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:22:37AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 13:08 +0100, Till Maas wrote: > > > Afaics this does not affect some minor issue, but a fundamental reason > > why package maintainer decided to become Fedora package maintainers. > > No volunteer package maintainer is in general forced to create updates > > and I am very sure that the volunteer package maintainers usually do not > > create updates that they do not want to use. So if you forbid package > > maintainers to package the version they want or need to use, being a > > fedora package maintainer becomes pretty useless for them. > > I really think we want to have package maintainers whose motivation is a > bit stronger than 'I use this myself, so, meh, why not package it'. At > least for packages that are part of the default install, I would expect > at least some awareness on the part of the packager that the work he is > doing needs to fit into the larger whole which is the released product.
So we are back to "not all packages are equal". I agree, that the work hast to fit in the whole community, but this is where there are at least two big parties within Fedora, that have a complete opposite idea about it. And an official view, about what this is for Fedora does afaik not exist, yet. Regards Till
pgpSly5OfETQW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
