Re: gnokii-0.6.13-1.fc5.rf incompatible with Fedora Extras

Dag Wieers wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Rex Dieter wrote:

>> Besides, what's the point of duplicating Extras' pkgs, *especially* if
>> they're incompatible?
> 
> I did not see this message earlier. But the answer should be quite obvious
> and I find the question a bit offensive.

No, not obvious, and my intent certainly was not to offend.  In my
experience, when Extras' picks up a package I've had to maintain otherwise,
I usually think "yay, one less thing *I* have to do", but that's just me. 
If I see problems with Extras' packaging, I report it to the maintainers in
question.

> I have been packaging gnokii before Fedora Extras existed. Fedora Extras 
> introduced this packaged years after I was providing a package, and
> instead of looking what existed already and/or discussing changes they
> made they choose to make it incompatible with my version

Nobody "chose" to make incompatibilities, and it's not really
anyone's "fault".  The fact is you distribute 0.6.13, and Extras does
0.6.12, and apparently there was a soname jump in there.  That's it.

> We were even packaging it for Fedora Core 1 and 2 before it entered Fedora
> Extras.

That you packaged it first, frankly, doesn't matter all that much.  Extras
is free for and usable by *all* Fedora users and is a true community effort
that shares a common infrastructure.  I don't think the same be said of
rpmforge... (though please correct me if I'm wrong).

> ... Extras criticisms snipped ...

To be honest, I too saw serious shortcomings in how Extras was run and
worked.  I chose to get involved to elicit positive change, and I encourage
you (and everyone else) to do the same if you still feel Fedora/Extras
doesn't float your boat.  IMO, it's a much better alternative than taking a
Cartman "screw you guys... I'm going home" approach.

-- Rex