https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2311762 --- Comment #13 from Daniel Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Richard W.M. Jones from comment #12) > Some issues that I'm not clear on: > > (5) Do we need FESCO permission to bundle those libraries? Or is adding the > Provides bundled > sufficient? Reading the policy (linked below) it seems as if we're OK > just to add > the Provides. Yeah, I believe we're OK per the policy you link: [quote] Fedora packages SHOULD make every effort to avoid having multiple, separate, upstream projects bundled together in a single package. ... All packages whose upstreams allow them to be built against system libraries MUST be built against system libraries. ...snip.... All packages whose upstreams have no mechanism to build against system libraries MAY opt to carry bundled libraries, but if they do, they MUST include an indication of what they bundle. [/quote] The third sentence applies here. I added the "Provides: bundled(...)" deps and against each have a comment explaining why it is bundled. > (6) What, if anything, is the upstream status of the patches? Are they > forever downstream > or is there an attempt to get them upstream? Assuming this is approved for Fedora, then it definitely makes sense to try to get the rest of the patches upstream. Many probably won't go upstream in their current form as they're just quick workarounds. It should be possible to figure out an acceptable solution for upstream for each though. The big unknown is how responsive upstream will be. The level of activity in upstream is relatively low, but they do seem to take patches & discuss PRs though, so worth trying. I opened a PR for the GCC 15 compat issue yesterday as that one is a clear bug shortly to be affecting everyone so most likely to be accepted as-is. > (7) Can we make it easier to unbundle things by working with upstream, eg by > adding more > cmake -DUSE_SYSTEM_XXX flags? And remove the unnecessary libtelnet at > the same time? Yes, it makes sense to try to extend their current cmake config pattern for the rest. > > (8) Needs to follow the bundled policy here (by adding a comment in the spec > file): > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Bundled_Software_policy/ > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling I figured the comment I have just before each "Provides: bundled(...)" is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the 2nd link. For the 1st link I guess I need to open an issue upstream to raise the problem as a starting point -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2311762 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202311762%23c13 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
