On Thu, 2020-11-12 at 20:47 +0800, Honggang LI wrote:
> > 
> > In terms of "upstream" I'm not sure what you mean there, because
> 
> https://github.com/linux-rdma/rdma-core/blob/master/redhat/rdma-core.spec
> 
> It is the "upstream" spec file.

This kind of "oh, the *real* spec file is in another castle" approach
is just impractical for distributions. It's always a problem, but it's
*especially* a problem if the distribution spec file does not indicate
the existence of the "upstream" spec in any way. As is the case here.
You cannot expect another Fedora packager to look at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rdma-core/blob/master/f/rdma-core.spec
and know that there is an "upstream" of that file, because *nothing in
it tells them that there is*.

If you're going to have this kind of "upstream" spec file...well, I
wish you wouldn't. But if you do, *AT MINIMUM*, the "downstream" spec
files need to have a clear explanation that there is an "upstream" spec
file, with a justification as to why, and a link to it. At the very
top. Otherwise there is no chance any other Fedora packager is going to
find it.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to