Dnia 24-05-2006, śro o godzinie 12:44 -0400, Bill Nottingham napisał(a):
Tomasz Kłoczko (kloczek(a)zie.pg.gda.pl) said:
> And what is so problematic in make this as "this feacture will be
> disscontinued in FC6 ?"
> Again: on strict distribution packages set amout of work is compareable
> but just introduced way allow continue to grow entrophy .. probably this
> way will create in future more cases for fixing.
> Why not cut this now ?
Because you're nuts. :)
Seriously, you will then have reports from lots of users -
"this software doesn't build on Fedora! Fedora sucks, I'm using
Ubuntu." Upstream maintainers who don't care about these things
will just pile on, saying "Why use Fedora? This is just like
gcc-2.96 all over again."
write patch for remove <foo>-config script -> introduce this in distro
resources and in the same moment submit this to <foo> package maintainer
with some technical argumentation "why it will good remove this" (one
reason we know .. it is bad multilib behavior) for include this in main
If we want to have the foo-config scripts warn, sure. Possibly
even patch our own Core & Extras packages. But randomly breaking
third-party software so it won't build isn't really practical.
I'm start from fribidi. OK. Lets look on some facts. Where it library is
used ? abiword ? (in all other cases applications are using fibidi
embeded in pango) huh .. where in this case is *real* problem ?