> I'm one of package maintainers of rdma-core. There is a patch > applied without any maintainers' review/approve. I had sent two emails > to patch committer to ask him/her to push the change to upstream. > But never get response. So someone pinged me on IRC about this, I never saw the emails because you replied to the git commit and I auto archive/mute all those emails because I get a LOT of them. You never tried other communication mechanisms that I'm aware of such are IRC. Also note there is no packaging requirements to get approval from package maintainers. > The patch maybe useful or fix something. But the divergence between > upstream and Fedora rawhide is what I don't want to see, because > such divergence is source of regression issues. The addition of libpcap linking against libibverbs pulled in a whole of extra dependencies that aren't used by Workstation/Cloud or anything that doesn't have infinband. So this just splits it out to a smaller package, for a IB user they will see nothing different. I don't see how a spec file change is a "regression", there's nothing that will regress here, the rdma-core depends on the package and if anyone installs that they also get the new sub package, but if the general user doesn't have IB hardware, which is the vast majority of users even in the enterprise, they don't have to unnecessarily have extra stuff clogging up their system. In terms of "upstream" I'm not sure what you mean there, because upstream of Fedora is generally tar files but do feel free to push the change upstream if you prefer that for managing stuff. Peter _______________________________________________ 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
