https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3152
--- Comment #17 from Wolfgang Ulbrich <[email protected]> 2014-01-27 16:02:55 CET --- (In reply to comment #15) > (In reply to comment #13) > > > > The dropbox repo has only one package, nautuilus-dropbox, a dropbox client. > > In > > other words, the sense of this repo is to install nautilus-dropbox. > > So if a user installs this repo from rpmfusion he wants to install > > nautilus-dropbox. > > Without this repo in rpmfusion i can say it's a third party app and i don't > > care about it. > > > > If you and others says my way of looking at isn't correct, than i will > > ignore > > and closed bugreports of this conflict in future. ;) > > > > I don't agree with you to file out a report against caja-dropbox, because > > the > > prob only exits if this repo becomes an official rpmfusion package. > > > > PS: Imo, this package should be hosted in rpmfusion-nonfree, because > > nautilus-dropbox installs closed source dropbox code. > > Well, is this that complicated? There are dozens of repos out there which > generates conflicts with the main repos. We have three kind of repos: > - The main fedora and rpmfusion repos. > - The rpmfusion list of repos which are said to be compatible with the main > ones. > - All other, caja dropbox being one of them. > > I think we must accept that these conflicts for now. The only way to resolve > this is to work the the caja-dropbox team to make it parallel installable with > the original stuff. We certainly don't like conflicts, but they do happen from > time to time (if it's not done, caja's package could at least be marked as > conflicting Dropbox's). For me the cleanest way is to create a package which include the file-browser extensions for nautilus, caja and nemo with three subpackages instead of creating a repo package ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
