The patch is fairly small, but you're definitely not wrong about that. I'm
just not sure if there's better options unfortunately.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 6:37 AM Evgeni Golov wrote:
> Thanks for all the explanations!
>
> I think my main concerns are the fact that we (well, really, you) end up
>
Thanks for all the explanations!
I think my main concerns are the fact that we (well, really, you) end up
having to maintain this libsolv "fork" essentially forever (in contrast to
the others, where you currently just need to upload the releases) and users
get a slightly different result depending
>
> Thanks Daniel,
>
> I've reposted to pulp-dev, so you might want to re-post your reply
> there too, but:
>
> Great, if createrepo and libcomps is just "intermediate" while we
> actively (try) to help upstream get there, I can totally take that.
>
> For solv: well, if they don't want it there, IM
My apologies! s/Evengi/Evgeni, the letters got swapped in my brain : /
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:37 AM Daniel Alley wrote:
> Reposting my response from the other thread:
>
> Hi Evengi,
>
> In the case of createrepo_c and libsolv, the upstream merged all of the
> build script changes that were n
Reposting my response from the other thread:
Hi Evengi,
In the case of createrepo_c and libsolv, the upstream merged all of the
build script changes that were necessary to enable producing Python
packages, so in that sense the packages we are producing are completely
unmodified. However, the RPM
