On 05/28/2015 04:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Some things to consider:A. If someone packages software into Fedora, are they obligated to maintain all current and future software which might depend on it in perpetuity? B. If so, should that maintainer be allowed to veto the addition of new dependencies? If you vote yes to both, get ready for it to be even harder to package software for Fedora.
I vote no to both. A is clearly a straw-man argument. If you are maintaining package Foo, which is a dependency of Bar, you have no obligation to support Bar. You do, however, have an obligation to make an effort to support backward compatibility in Foo, so that Bar is forced to upgrade itself to accommodate changes to Foo. Note, however, that listing a specific version of Foo as a a dependency rather than having *at least* that version makes all dependency issues caused by this a Bar issue, not a Foo issue. And, of course, there's nothing forcing you to continue as maintainer if you wish or need to stop.
B, of course, is an absurd idea, and I doubt that this was an accident. Whoever maintains Foo has the obligation to see to it that any and all packages that Foo depends on are listed properly, but has no say over what other packages require Foo.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
