On 15 martie 2014 00:44:29 EET, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
How would this apply to something like EPEL, which in el6 has XFCE packaged. Would it be acceptable to pull that in, or would that
simply
count as 1 of the 3?
That was something that I figured would also need to be planned for. Where do these packages live? Who is caring for them? My initial viewpoint is that it would be nice if the people on a desktop were co-maintainers on the package set if it were in EPEL.
Beware that - leaving sponsorship aside - becoming an EPEL maintainer implies accepting the Fedora EULA. I know of people who refused to /could not become Fedora contributors because they could/would not accept that license.
The main thing is to try and make sure that stuff gets accidentally abandoned
"gets" or "does not get" ? :)
- Some level of governance needs to be established so that there
is a
committee that can make sure that a desktop has 'sponsors', that it
is
not
just code thrown over a wall and left, and that users are not left surprised when updates to the desktop occur. They may also make up packaging rules and guidelines as needed to alleviate problems that
come
up.
I'd say it makes sense to follow the Fedora packaging rules, updated for use in our SIGs env. For instance one Fedora rule which needs to be excluded is the recently adopted one which drops packaging of SystemV initscripts.