--- Comment #17 from Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de> 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
> 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
- 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
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.