Adam Williamson wrote:
> We provide upstream code in a unified set of repositories, tested to
> interact properly. Did I say that we're not supposed to patch code
> shipped by upstream? No. What I said - or rather, the belief my
> statement was based on, because this isn't exactly what I said - is that
> we don't generally carry permanent long-term downstream patches just to
> change upstream behaviour that we disagree with. This is a bad thing to
> do.
I don't agree with this statement, and in fact we do carry such patches in
several packages (and I think that's often a good thing, upstreams sometimes
have really horrible ideas about how their software should behave (by
default)).
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
