* Kevin Kofler via devel: > Michael J Gruber wrote: >> I am sick of this. Really. I am so sick of this way of stomping on each >> others' feet. > > My pet peeve is provenpackagers or comaintainers who add unwanted > automagic (autorelease, autosetup, autochangelog) to my packages. I do > not want any of that in my packages, it just makes my work harder (or > in practice, just wastes my time for the revert that I am inevitably > going to do). If the package does not contain any patches yet, it's not really possible to infer the maintainer intentions. %setup vs %autosetup doesn't matter much in that case, so it doesn't really tell us anything. Likewise if the package uses %autosetup, but without -p1, and there are no patches. Does the maintainer really prefer those awkarward -p-less patches? We don't know. Asking individual maintainers for trivial changes does not scale. The alternative would be not to address FTBFS and other build issues, maybe file bugs, and rely on active maintainers instead. But I don't think that can work for Fedora, practically speaking. Fedora lacks Debian's ban on forcing packagers to do certain work. In the past, FESCo has used that to order that certain packagers must keep carrying out certain work they do not want to do, but I think that only means anything if the victim packager is a Red Hatter on certain teams, I think. Others will just quit if they disagree. Thanks, Florian -- _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
