Hi
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > On 2014-06-27 10:17, Till Maas wrote: > >> Yes, I missed this as well. Also IIRC the guidelines demand an patch >> status comment for each patch in the spec file, so just adding patch >> without noting why it is not upstreamable or information about when/how >> it was upstreamed is bad and should IMHO not be done by provenpackagers. >> > > When patching others' code, I generally follow the existing style; I can > tell you that *many* packages don't have these patch comments. Thanks for > bringing this to my attention. > The guidelines don't demand it but it is recommended https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainer_responsibilities#Work_with_upstream https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects Rahul
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
