On 09. 02. 21 1:54, Robbie Harwood wrote:
Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 08. 02. 21 20:38, Robbie Harwood wrote:
Robbie Harwood <rharwood@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
A simple `sed` can be applied in `%prep` as a temporary (or even
permanent) downstream solution.
In most cases, performing the following replacement should be enough:
s/^(\s*)import mock/\1from unittest import mock/
s/^(\s*)from mock import /\1from unittest.mock import /
a couple lines of sed to all (affected) specfiles. I hope I have
misunderstood, because that has no mechanism to get the changes back
into upstreams. Could you clarify what you intend to do?
Turns out this is indeed what they meant. I would like to reiterate
my concern that this has no mechanism to get the changes back into
upstreams: it's just Fedora deviating further from the rest of the
world, not leading the charge.
Not sure who you mean by "them" in this case,
Change authors. So, you.
I have not made any such changes. Except maybe in a couple of my packages I
co-maintain.
but doing this downstream only was never my intention. I am the change
owner.
You have already replied to one of the PRs
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-requests-gssapi/pull-request/1
to comment that it couldn't be merged. It follows the downstream-only
sed approach, you'll note.
I have commented this PR but I have not even seen the diff yet.
If I've seen it, I'd ask whether it can be proposed upstream as well.
I'd ask that whether or not it is applied as a sed or patch (or any other way).
Also note that it is a Pull Request, not a provenpackager mass pushing changes.
The PR is actually driven by a RHEL 9 bugzilla because the python3-mock package
is marked as unwanted in https://github.com/minimization/content-resolver-input
As I've already said in my first reply to you in January:
Disclaimer: The package is listed as unwanted in ELN (so the RHEL maintainers
might get some internal spam about dropping the dependency). If they will be
interested, I might end up sending a Fedora PR for such packages.
Please stop accusing me of ill intention. I do what I say I do. I have no
interest in tricking Fedora to approve a change only to do things differently
once approved. My communication is and always has been as transparent as
possible -- wrt this Change or anything else.
I strongly believe in the "upstream first" paradigm. Sometimes, time is the
essence and things need to be done in downstream first, yet even then I
encourage everybody to propose the change upstream.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
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
