https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1648728 --- Comment #10 from Petr Viktorin <pviktori@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #9) > Sure, but in either case once we decide what upstream to follow, we'll have > to request upstreams of whatever packages to switch to it. Yes. If one is clearly better than the other, it shouldn't be an issue, right? > Would it be possible to ask the python-progressbar upstream to retire it, > and add a notice requesting people to move to the newer one, which appears > to have more features and is better maintained? IMO it would be better to merge with the fork, since "progressbar" is clearly a better name than "progressbar2". > If this cannot be sorted at an upstream level, the downstream resorts will > be to make the two conflict, or we carry downstream patches for lots of > software to make the two installable not conflict. (Neither of these are > attractive to me). Exactly. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
