On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:39:24 -0700, Scott wrote: > The problem is Fedora is it's not moving fast enough and adding enough > packages. The fact that 3-4 people can deliver what they can't is > preposterous. You compare apples and oranges. Nobody has claimed that it would be easier to publish something in a system where you depend on QA from other developers. This has been beaten to death in older discussions. We have yet to see how official Fedora Extras will tackle the QA system. And let me tell you one thing. Being a contributor at fedora.us, I've seen hundreds of packages from many different packagers. There are packagers which show that _they_ maintain the package and only need somebody's approval to get the package built and published. On the contrary, there are packagers who submit packages which don't even build or install. They give you the feeling that they don't care about a package enough. Some don't reply to reviews, making the time, which you have spent on testbuilding and reviewing a package, being wasted time. It's so easy to stay away. My respect to those who do the best with the existing infrastructure and policies and who ask questions in case something is unclear. If "3-4 people" think they can create and maintain more than 1000 packages alone, let them do it. Thank them for doing it, if those packages seem to work fine for you. Although I don't see that all those packages are up-to-date or moving faster than packages in fedora.us. Developing and maintaining packages takes time. And many developers either don't have enough of that time or don't have the time to maintain a package painstakingly and stay in close contact with the upstream project. So, unless additional contributors maintain additional packages, don't expect developers at fedora.us (or official Fedora Extras in the near future) to duplicate efforts and in order to increase quantity, try to provide all the packages found in 3rd party repositories. Btw, just a week ago, incidentally, I was pointed to a package in Dag Wieers' repository, which he copied from my fedora.us package in early October, apparently saving him time. He has still not descended from his high horse to reply to my private mail. Though, on the same day he repaired the package silently already. > They really need to take a hard look at this. Not fedora.us. Why should the active contributors at fedora.us see existing 3rd party repositories as competition and try to provide the same packages? -- Fedora Core release 3 (Heidelberg) - Linux 2.6.9-1.681_FC3 loadavg: 1.02 1.10 1.13
Attachment:
pgp8LIlGsy674.pgp
Description: PGP signature
