On Mar 9, 2008, at 4:01 PM, Zeffie wrote:
> so have at it and feel free to let me know if there is something
> else I need to be building.. I really enjoy building rpms and one
> of the main reasons I've gone public this list is so I could find
> some more interesting things to build.
But to revisit the portion I don't see addressed--- changes to the
base install, like updating to a current proftpd, if those go into
the base source as a commit, then the project grows, is increased in
stability and reliability, and contributions are cohesive and there
aren't worries about stepping on pieces of code here and there (this
all comes down to a consensus about how to do things in the end, any
collaborated project does that).
I think that the benefits of this would go a long way and the issues
that made this thread go where it has would, simply, not be issues.
Do you see that would help everything relating to the project, your
own efforts, and everyones customer base? I see it :)
My personal preferences: I'd not mind seeing more things available
to the base as an rpm, and the "vendors" charging something to make
thing more convenient (added to UI, whatever). Those who have some
background and want to add things to the backend by installing from
RHEL/ CentOS rpms or building from stated RHEL/ CentOS-compatible
source could do so without concern about BQ-specific changes
elsewhere causing unexpected behavior Those who are reselling lots to
users could pay for the convenience and UI fanciness that *their*
customers appreciate. I think it would make the base that much
better, avoid duplication of effort, and allow both the base and the
BQ UI to grow much more rapidly than it has to date.
B