On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 10:13:18PM +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: > Hi > > Following recent discussions and to reduce the maintenance burden, I'm > planning to start merging native and mingw packages. Initially, I'll be > looking at these packages where I maintain both variants:
I've done the same with all the mingw packages I maintained just before Fedora 37 branched. So the following native packages now just contain mingw sub-RPMs: libvirt, libvirt-glib, libosinfo, osinfo-db, osinfo-db-tools, gtk-vnc I'm so happy to have reduced this maint burden. I see a few new mingw packages pending in package review and think it'd be nice to first ask the native maintainer to consider unified package, before we approve any new separate mingw packages. Our Mingw packaging guidelines, however, exclusively describe fully separated mingw packages. So if I suggest this to a native package maintainer who is not already familiar with mingw, they would be right to question whether this is a desirable thing. IOW, I think we need to look at getting the mingw packaging docs updated to promote unified packaging as an officially supported (and even preferred) option, alongside separate packaging. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ mingw mailing list -- mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to mingw-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
