[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fedora-devel-list
Subject:    Re: High Performance SSH/SCP - HPN-SSH
From:       "Jeff Spaleta" <jspaleta () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-07-12 17:50:20
Message-ID: 604aa7910707121050x1d89caa0lcddf66a2a8e4f49f () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 7/12/07, Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
> Diverging from upstream is a wee-bit against fedora's objectives/goals, but
> ultimately, it is the pkg maintainer's call to make.


When upstream is working actively with downstream contributors, this
policy works well.
If upstream blows off downstream contributors who are trying to play
ball (and there isn't some sort of weird personality conflict
nastiness) the policy can feel burdensome because its re-enforcing a
broken process instead of re-enforcing a healthy innovation process.

I can't judge the problem here, but if this work has been going on in
parallel for 3+ years, something in the upstream communication is
broken. The question is, is this a fixable or a forkable situation?
Does Fedora has as a community have any leverage with upstream openssh
(via an active fedora contributor who conributes to upstream perhaps?)
to put this functionality/patch firmly onto the roadmap for upstream
adoption?

-jef

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]