https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686506 --- Comment #16 from Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@xxxxxxxxx> --- > - or keeping wireguard as a meta package If you'd like to have a "wireguard" meta package, *in addition to the wireguard-tools package*, that's totally fine with me. There might indeed at some point be other things that get included in there. kmod(wireguard.ko) seems like it'd make sense, for example. > We can do "Recommends: kmod(wireguard.ko)" until it is mainlined, which will hopefully be soon. > @Jason, has there been any progress on getting WireGuard mainlined? Yes, working on it! >From Joe: > You beat me to it. If you want someone to help co-maintain this package, please let me know. I'd actually strongly recommend adding Joe as a co-maintainer. He understands the project extremely well, has been with us packaging it from the beginning, and is pretty much an ideal maintainer. We've got a good working relationship, so as weird quirks upstream come up, I'm pretty confident Joe can roll with doing the right thing on the packaging side. -- 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
