On 03/07/13 19:57, Axilleas Pipinellis wrote: > 1) GitLab uses some forked gems. > > These are the forked gems by GitLab which add some extra functionality > or fix some bugs of the original gem: > > Upstream | GitLab > ------------------------------------- > grit | gitlab-grit > grack | gitlab-grack > gollum-lib | gitlab-gollum-lib > omniauth-ldap | gitlab_omniauth-ldap > pygments.rb | gitlab-pygments.rb > ------------------------------------- > > Vit Ondruch, my mentor, pointed me in these FESCO [4] and FPC [5] > tickets, which pretty much conclude that: > > "FESCo is fine with forks as long as they are parallel installable and > don't interfere with each other." > > and > > "The FPC does not see a need for additional guidelines relating to > forks at this time, they should be treated like any other package." > > I also raised this issue in #fedora-devel today and they told me the > same thing FESCo concluded. > > I think GitLab's forks don't abide by FESCo's verdict, as both original > and forked gem are called with the same library, eg. require 'grit', so > there is no distinction between them. > > I am cc'ing Sytse Sijbrandij from GitLab's core team to talk about what > changes could be made in order for the forks to get accepted. If upstream don't fix it themselves, couldn't you just patch gitlab-grit and gitlab so that it does "require 'gitlab-grit'" instead? -- Jamie Nguyen _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
