The point of software is to provide a service to an end-user. Users
don't run software because it has good packaging policies, they run
software because it meets a need that they have. If they can't get
that software from Fedora, they *will* get it from another source (or
use a different OS that doesn't get in their way). I'll take a moment
to remind people that two of Fedora's Four Foundations are "Features"
and "First". We want Fedora to be the most feature-complete
distribution available and we want to get there before anyone else
does. I would say that holding to our no-bundling policy actively
defeats our efforts on that score.
Those are valid points, but I think that there are alternative
approaches to address them.
The reason for this proposal is relatively simple: we know the
advantages to unbundling, particularly with security and resource-
usage. However, the world's developer community largely *does not
care*. We fought the good fight, we tried to bring people around to
seeing our reasoning and we failed.
I think we should really pause and think about what does the 'does
not care' mindset entail. It's not just the attitude towards
bundling: it extends to security problems, integration issues, and
who knows what other aspect of the product. I concede that it's, as
you said, a list of the same tired arguments---but they do have a
point! I think it is a mistake to declare defeat, even if it's
nominally only on the specific issue of bundling.