On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 13:28 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On 09/16/2009 08:59 AM, Jochen Schmitt wrote: > > Am 16.09.2009 17:47, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi: > > > >> That still leaves open the question of why no one has asked rsync > >> upstream to make their fork publicly available instead of hoarding > >> it as a private, internal copy. > > > > I would ask, why the modification will not integrated in the > > 'official' Fedora zlib package? > > > > After this integration the fedora maintainer can forward the pach to > > the upsream author. > > > And a short followup -- I've gone through the zlib-devel mailing list > archives now. I was unable to find any request for the rsync patches to > be merged into mainline zlib. The mailing list archives only go back to > March 2002, so it could be that the request to merge came before that > directly to one of the zlib authors. But if so, there's not a record of > what problems, if any, there were with the patch. My follow-up on this: I'm pursuing two tracks. I've mailed zlib maintainers directly - they specifically ask for questions to be sent to a direct email address rather than the zlib-devel list - to ask what their position is on this, so we can get some clarity there. I will pass on what (if anything) I hear back from them. Secondly, where would be the appropriate place to propose accepting zsync with the internal zlib? Is that something I should bring to the packaging committee? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
