David Cantrell wrote:
> * #2475 proposal: let's develop the idea of a new repo for
> lightly-maintained packages (dcantrell, 15:16:41)
This suggestion keeps coming up again and again, but the repetition does not
make it any more practical. A small handful individual maintainers wants to
use some library/infrastructure package(s) for their package builds, but at
the same time excuse themselves from actually maintaining those
library/infrastructure package(s). This may be more convenient to the
minority that gets to "lightly maintain" those packages, but at the cost of
offloading technical debt to the entire remainder of the community, both the
majority of maintainers (who would benefit from having the
library/infrastructure package(s) fully maintained as a potential build
and/or runtime dependency of their own package(s)) and the end users (who
would benefit from having the library/infrastructure package(s) fully
maintained to build local software, and in some cases, such as Tomcat, also
to use them directly).
I still believe that this concept is inherently incompatible with the idea
of a cooperative community distribution, and that bringing it up again and
again with minimally changed wording is not a constructive thing to do.
I can see why RHEL has a business case for having such "second-class
citizen" packages, but this is not how Fedora works or should work.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
