On Tue, 13 May 2008 13:20:14 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > What Jason complains about is that after > > taking all the jpp changes for a long time, when some problems were > > identified fedora side jpp was not notified of the fixes (aka downstream > > patch hoarding). > > > Just one further note, since I didn't make it clear in the last email. > It's not downstream patch hoarding if JPackage is not upstream. Since > there's no syncing between the packages since devrim took over, I'd be > hard pressed to say there is an upstream-downstream relationship between > the currently maintained package and the JPackage one. There was a > historical relationship but the package went the derived route instead > of the upstream-downstream route when the new maintainer took over. Then using the .jpp versioning scheme in the Fedora pkg is useless and misleading. You need to sync patches back and forth or else you get unexpected regression when a JPackage pkg updates the Fedora derived pkg without applying the same patch set. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
