On 10/08/2015 08:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 03:37:32PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Maybe we're trying to do too much.
>>
>> I suppose it's a question of choosing to do something which from a
>> software engineering perspective is not the best practice or not
>> includi
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 03:37:32PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Maybe we're trying to do too much.
>
> I suppose it's a question of choosing to do something which from a
> software engineering perspective is not the best practice or not
> including a package at all. I'd certainly prefer to see a s
On 10/08/2015 02:01 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 02:50:59PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>> There was a middle ground there that could have been pursued a little
>> more: the sandbock repo which less strict guidelines keeping the
>> current Fedora repo with the current po
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 02:50:59PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> There was a middle ground there that could have been pursued a little
> more: the sandbock repo which less strict guidelines keeping the
> current Fedora repo with the current policies.
I'm still generally in favor of that (and
On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 08:44:07AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> An unbundling triangle:
>
>
> inclination
>
> /\
> / \
>/\
> / all \
> A / three→ \ B
> / ideal \
>/
An unbundling triangle:
inclination
/\
/ \
/\
/ all \
A / three→ \ B
/ ideal \
/ unbundled \
/package \
/\
/
