https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295115 --- Comment #24 from jeremy.fergason@xxxxxxxxx --- @DaveJohansen No I have not been sponsored as a packager yet. @DennisChen I agree. To some extent this is the way that the Swift development team views the world. The package can be split into 3 different packages but the main package will still require a lot of bundling. Possible packages: Swift Compiler / REPL - Requires Sources 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11 Swift Pacakge Manager - Requires 5, 6 (depends on above) XCTest - Requires 8 (depends on Swift Compiler) It would also be nice to have the standard library be separate from the compiler package / REPL to ease distributing software built with swift. Regarding the LLDB conflict I agree that it is not good but I see no way around it as that is how Swift's REPL works. They have modified LLDB and it conflicts with the main package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx