-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On Mon, 2026-11-02 at 09:19 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2026-11-02 at 16:43 +0100, Lukasz Wojnilowicz wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is packaging a fork and naming it the same as upstream permissible? > > That just happened at > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2497737
> It happens, but I would usually expect to see a clear explanation in > the spec file, and that does not appear to be the case here. I would > expect there to be a bank of comments around the URL and Source lines > explaining why we prefer the fork and what the relationship between > the original repo and the fork is. Proposed text for that explanation: # The upstream should be https://github.com/arsenetar/dupeguru but # that version is almost dormant. The last release was four years ago, # and there are many critical outstanding pull requests that have # not been merged. # # https://github.com/carlbyington2/dupeguru/tree/fedora-build is a # fork with most of the open pull requests from arsenetar applied. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHMEAREKADMWIQSuFMepaSkjWnTxQ5QvqPuaKVMWwQUCaujhrhUcY2FybEBmaXZl LXRlbi1zZy5jb20ACgkQL6j7milTFsHN2QCdH4AeTpRAzAYY4X3PvrNMJ7j0TZwA n3v10/UiMb5hFVL1EpszcrehVQ/0 =A4+S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
