On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:48:07 -0700, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:37 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: >> >> Dear Jesse, >> >> you yourself do not accept patches beyond what you then, at that moment, >> think are applicable use-cases of Fedora Project Release Engineering only >> to work something up yourself two weeks later. > > Yes, if I didn't like the patch, or how it was done, I didn't accept it. > Just like any other upstream. Did I use your exact code when I did it > myself two weeks later? Probably not. > Oh no, you certainly did not. What I meant is that first you reject a patch because it's not within the scope of rel-eng and then two weeks later all of a sudden it *is* within the scope of rel-eng but you neglect the fact that a patch is in your mailbox somewhere. You did not say "I don't like the patch" or "This should be done differently", you said "this is not going to be in pungi because rel-eng has no use for it". >> >> We've also seen upstream reject very reasonable patches -that were in the >> upstream repo already, authored by @redhat.com of course- be >> cherry-picked >> to another branch for whatever reason I've offered to help with (some QA >> concerns for one). > > And they're well within their right, as an upstream project, to reject > such things. Just because the patch works great on one branch doesn't > mean it'll work the same on another. They are the ones to decide that. > This is how opensource development works. > Please do not put words in my mouth and please consider stopping to patronize me like that. I did not say they are not within their rights. I do say they are/were wrong to do so, and that is my opinion. I'm going to leave it at that or this is just going to have to become another thread. -Jeroen -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
