On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 4:50 PM Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 4:47 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 02:57:45PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > Instead I prefer a clone of the master upstream git repo and maintain a > > > branch with patches cherry-picked into it. This is used to auto-generate > > > patches for the Fedora RPM, at the same time updating the patch file list > > > in the RPM spec. The only manual step is adding the changelog entry & > > > bumping release number. > > > > Quick note: this is essentially what debian does. > > Ugh. Can we please just agree that source-git (vs. dist-git) is almost > always a bad idea? I can see the benefit for some very complex packages that have lots of patches, so I think it's not unreasonable for source-git to be an _option_. (Maybe one that should require approval?) But I'll echo what I wrote in my other message: for the majority of packages which are relatively simple and don't deviate much from upstream, or try not to deviate from upstream, I think it's a bad idea and won't improve things. We need to keep the simple/everyday use cases in mind here. I like that I can build a Fedora package with just a specfile-- essentially, a bit of metadata about how to build and install a package-- and don't need to modify an upstream archive. I would be disappointed if we moved towards a Debian-like way of doing packaging. Ben Rosser _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
