On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 11:49 PM Sérgio Basto <ser...@serjux.com> wrote:
> IMHO, Please use `rfpkg new-sources v31.0..b6ddf202a4.patch` to avoid > at least send 28K bytes of text in email I'll point out that having the patch files included this way (and in the emails) has been standard procedure for quite some time for at least this package. I do wonder, however, that given that for this package one is simply using the upstream repo at a more recent commit that one should not at least consider pulling the git archive at that newer commit and new-sources(ing) that new tarball and eliminating some part of the existing workload (replacing it with different packaging workload of course). Last I read the packaging guidelines (admittedly a long time ago) nuanced cases such as this did not seem to be clearly spelled out as to the right or wrong approaches (and I would expect that some packager discretion should be continued). > btw sometimes it breaks my gnome evolution I would hope you have opened bugs upstream with the evolution folk, as I would hate to think future packaging approaches/guidelines are based on what does not break specific MUAs. _______________________________________________ rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org
