> Everyone cares about you, because atm (imo, at least), you are upstream rpm. > Fedora cares, but they also have been scared of breaking rpm, mostly out of > paranoia (unfounded or not, but I don't necessarily blame them). What > Fedora (and other distributions) care most about *now* is a development > model for rpm that goes beyond a one-man show.
Heh, with friends like that who needs enemies?
And I'm not upstream rpm, I am a fork of RPM with a single developer active.
Absolutely nothing has changed, in fact I have been largely the only RPM developer since (at least) 2000. RPM has never been more than a 1 man show, don't let anyone fool you.
But -- in fact -- I secured write access for several other non-RH people on cvs.rpm.org when I forked RPM in June 2003. There's nothing stopping any of those people from doing whatever they want with RPM.
I do, however, reserve the right of final call on what patches go into rpm releases, particularly if I'm the one (as currently) who has to support all versions of rpm, even those distros that insist on not fixing rpm bugs like Fedora, at 2am on Sunday night on #rpm.
In practice, there are very very few patches that I have not accepted into rpm ever. I see no reason to be forced to accept patches that are clearly and definitely mis-guided, I'm sure you understand.
> Question is, would you be willing to share development (and, frankly, play > nice with the other kids)? I personally think that any future of rpm > development without your (jbj's) integral involvement/input, would be rpm's > loss.
I don't play with kids. I fix rpm problems. If you don't understand the difference, well, just go shopping! I'm sure some vendor will take your money.
73 de Jeff |