On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 12:33:17AM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
There's some basis for Jef's argument in the "Fedora is not a dumping
ground for old, unmaintained software" philosophy. OTOH, the line between
no upstream, a little upstream activity, and maintained by the Fedora
Packager could get blurry here. So if we're planning on proposing some
actual guidelines regarding what is an appropriate level of upstream
activity to consider a package for Fedora, a conversation about this is
This comes up now and then. Some package are completly unmaintained, but
also completly stable and don't need an upstream maintainer anymore, so
that maintaining them in fedora is right. Some can be maintained by the
fedora packager if he has time and skills. For some others not having
any upstream is bound to trouble because of potential security issues,
and the package should better be dropped from fedora.
I'd say leave it to the packager and use the usual disagreement
procedure (complain to the list, escalate to fesco).