On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 10:41, Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
Hello,
On Jul 1 10:06 Bernhard M. Wiedemann wrote:
I remember some years ago kkaempf told the story how he packaged something to build for both Fedora and openSUSE. Fedora accepted the package, openSUSE didnt - because there were some (possibly openSUSE-only) macros that "could have been used".
https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-packaging/2017-07/msg00079.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- In general it seems to be good when openSUSE RPM spec files are in compliance with a reasonable openSUSE standard.
But on the other hand enforcing it could be a hindrance for openSUSE contributors to use ready-made RPM spec files from whatever upstream projects also for openSUSE RPMs with only some minor openSUSE-specific adaptions to get software easily built also for openSUSE.
What is more important for openSUSE: Be open for others (and accept diversity) or be uniform (to make maintenance easier)?
Please don't misuse the important topic of diversity to further your agenda. If diversity is truly your goal, lets aim for diversity of opinions, genders, cultures, etc, not a diversity in package quality.
So by striving to have uniform, easy-to-maintain packages we get less packages. And less packagers, too.
In general uniformity does not make life easier for free openSUSE contributors but perhaps uniformity is mainly useful for some special SUSE maintenance people?
The current processes are open to anyone, and the standards have been established through regular iterations by the the diverse openSUSE community, who are also responsible for their implementation. openSUSE's level of engineering excellence is repeatedly cited as a reason many of our users are drawn to our offerings. We should never put that at risk. I notice many of the complainants against the status quo in this thread are SUSE employees who are either expressing opinions or relaying the opinions of others that do not comply with SUSE's Open Source Policy. https://opensource.suse.com/suse-open-source-policy I would recommend that those employees contact their management to discuss their inability to comply or disinterest in following company policy. The benefit or lack thereof a publicly announced company policy is best not discussed on any mailing-list. I would also point out that if the openSUSE community reduced its level of quality and uniformity in the codebase, there is a significant chance that openSUSE's usefulness to SUSE would be directly impacted. An openSUSE with less reliable package quality would require significant extra work by SUSE, probably requiring significantly more effort by the very same employees advocating here for openSUSE to be less consistent in its quality controls. I seems logical to me for both the benefit of SUSE & openSUSE that as much of that work possible should be done early, in the open, and distributed as part of a broader community. I think the only sensible path forward would be for those unhappy with the status quo would be to contribute to improving the automation so it's easier and smoother for contributors while still enforcing openSUSE's current standards. Such contributions are probably best done in the form of pull requests to https://github.com/openSUSE/openSUSE-release-tools rather than continuing this thread. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org