On 11/28/05, Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)mattdm.org> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 01:40:15AM +0100, Paul Wouters wrote:
> Do you think there is a fundamental problem with people being able to get
> the sources easilly? Is yum fundamentally flawed for this? Is it too much
> work to put in yum?
> We might appreciate decisions better if we know why they are made in a
> certain way.
It's been discussed over and over; that's why Seth is being so abrupt. The
archives to this list and the yum list are public, so you can certainly find
out why they've been made.
The short answer is that it violates the principle of "do one thing and do
it well". Adding features like this clutters up yum's interface, not to
mention the internal code. Having it separate is cleaner.
I did several searches in the archives (at gmane) but was unable to
find anything... I guess I should have tried the yum list. I didn't it
existed at the time though.
I would like to add one thing to this discussion, and that is a quote
from the GNU GPL:
"If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering
access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent
access to copy the source code from the same place counts as
distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not
compelled to copy the source along with the object code."
Notice "offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the
same place". I'm not trying to say or imply that anything is violating
the GPL here, but I think some users expect this equivalent access to
mean that it's just as easy to get the source rpms. And I think the
designated 'place' here is yum.
In this essence I do not think this is outside of Fedora or yum's goals.
I am happy to accept a 'no' answer though, and thanks for your time.