On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 11:05:38AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Spec_Maintenance_and_Canonicity
> >
> > Not saying it contradicts the guideline above, just FYI.
> >
> In practice, there are several projects that blatantly ignore this.
> Off the top of my head:

> * libvirt stack packages (excluding php-libvirt, as I maintain that
> and have no rights to the libvirt-php repo)

Claiming we ignore the guideline is wrong. As the primary package
maintainer, I do consider upstream repos to have the canonical
copy of the spec file, but do *not* just blindly overwrite changes
made in Fedora. If someone proposes a cleanup to the Fedora libvirt
related specs, we'll encourage them to send that as a patch to upstream.
If they don't, and just make the change to Fedora specs, we'll none the
less apply it to upstream copy ourselves, assuming it was functionally
correct. When updating to new libvirt releases, I'll do a diff between
upstream and Fedora specs to make sure I don't mistakenly kill some
change a Fedora provenpackager made that I missed upstream. This all
works very well and ensures Fedora packages get their spec updated
accurately when upstream releases come with new features that impact
on packaging.

|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to