On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 08:37:55AM -0700, Pete Travis wrote:
On Feb 26, 2015 6:57 AM, "Paul W. Frields"
<stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I wanted to resurface the third party repository topic before we get
> to next week's meeting. Currently we have the following page drafted
> that discusses the new disabled repo feature currently in Fedora 22
> Workstation:
>
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/3rdPartyApps
>
> Currently there's a policy from the Council (nee Board) on third party
> repos here:
>
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Third_Party_Repository_Policy
>
> This policy doesn't address one of the problems I believe we're trying
> to solve in software -- making developer access to non-libre (but
> legally OK) tools on Fedora less convoluted and burdensome.
>
> So there's not just the question of implementation and curation, but
> also getting a policy change approved by the Council.
>
This would make more sense to me as a Change proposal, with all the process
and publicity that comes with that. A change in Fedora like this is much
greater than the actual implementation details; treating it like a minor
gnome-software feature add isn't representative of the impact on the
project.
Except the Change process is focused on sorting out changes that make
more than the owner do work to integrate, vs. those that don't. I
think calling this a Change actually demote this to a purely technical
decision, and I don't want to see it treated that way. So I think
your suggestion achieves the opposite of what you intend.
--
Paul W. Frields
http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - -
http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow:
http://opensource.com