1 February 2005, 6-7+ pm
Ruminations about "Core" versus "Extras" -- how packaging happens,
who decides what goes in, how it is decided, both in Core & Extras.
The software process as it relates to Core, to Extras.
Questions about that process as it relates to why packages are included where.
- Interest-- Of developer(s)? Of users? Of populace?
- Marketability-- ?
Questions about how it is decided what to include in packages?
- Documentation-- (How much docs?) (What format? HTML/plaintext/docbook/LaTeX/dvi/ps/pdf?)
- Examples-- of use of package, or scripts, or ...
Developer decisions? Marketing decisions? Both? Politics?
Questions about why packages are created in the first place? In response to demand? Because the technology's cool? To create demand? To satisfy some geek's programming itch? Thrill of creativeness?
Example for thought -- Core offers tcl/tk
Core used to offer extensions for tcl/tk in RH7.3, RH9, FC1, called [incr Tcl]
RedHat (who in Red Hat?) decided to stop offering itcl (for some reason - but I don't know why), starting with FC2.
A bugzilla entry
My reason for interest - wanting to run the "Password Gorilla,"
So I've created a very rudimentary itcl .src.rpm package
And now I'm wondering -- "Gee, now that I've created this rudimentary itcl package that works for me, I wonder if Fedora Extras might want it?"
 http://www.tcl.tk/about/, http://tcl.sourceforge.net/
 http://incrtcl.sourceforge.net/itcl/, License: BSD
 http://www.fpx.de/fp/Software/Gorilla/ , License: GPL
sha1sum = b470ee12cfa060beb3c54b00b4861a6b03b4aa6b