On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 03:44:55PM -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
Let's suppose I submit this repository to consideration for
inclusion in
Fedora Workstation, so that if someone searches for "Dwarf Fortress" and
consents to be shown nonfree, third-party software, they can optionally
enable my repository and install my RPMs. However, it does not meet the
guidelines for inclusion on other editions, and I'm not interested in
fixing that for whatever reason. But that's okay, because if someone
_really_ wants to run this game on another edition, they can run "dnf
thirdparty enable tc01/dwarffortress", or something like that, provided
they know the repository exists.
So far, so good. I don't know if anyone is working on anything like the
"dnf thirdparty" thing you suggest, but it seems reasonable enough.
Now let's suppose someone _else_ wants to package the same game,
but for a
different edition. However, their package chooses to put game data in, say,
~/.local/share/dwarffortress/, and ships with a slightly different set of
associated utilities. (Or perhaps different versions of said utilities).
Their repository is approved though, because it meets the guidelines for
the other edition.
This is one of the reasons we didn't want significant overlap in the
targets for the different editions. However, if we get into *spins*
(where overlap is fair game!) approving external repos, I can see the
potential for a mess developing.
[...]
Now, possibly when the second person proposed the repository shipping
the
same software for review, the reviewer _should_ have said "hey, Workstation
already signed off on a third-party repository for this software, why don't
you try to collaborate with them", and only approved the second repository
should there have been some fundamental reason that reconciling the two
repositories was impossible (differing package formats for each edition,
etc). Maybe that is what will happen, or perhaps this is a problem fixable
by some sort of repository review tool that doesn't need policy. But this
The above seems like a decent policy if it turns out to be needed.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader