On 09/11/2020 14:50, Honggang LI wrote:
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:39:22PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Monday, 09 November 2020 at 14:23, Honggang LI wrote:
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 08:03:59AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 8:03 AM Honggang LI honli@redhat.com wrote:
hi
I'm one of package maintainers of rdma-core. There is a patch applied without any maintainers' review/approve. I had sent two emails to patch committer to ask him/her to push the change to upstream. But never get response.
The patch maybe useful or fix something. But the divergence between upstream and Fedora rawhide is what I don't want to see, because such divergence is source of regression issues.
What I should to do with that commit? Just blindly revert it?
Send it upstream yourself. If you don't like the divergence, help fix it by sending the patch upstream and working with them.
To be honest, the patch was applied without any PR or bugzilla opened, just very simple inline comment, I don't really understand the patch.
That is why I did not submit it to upstream.
Can you be more specific? Which patch are you talking about? I can see only one patch in the package and it was committed by you: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rdma-core/c/55352ca3c535f31dfce9ab7779ee4...
commit 59a8e2e0d0ddba785fc79c4731e0b8685893458b Author: Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com Date: Tue Sep 15 00:26:18 2020 +0100
Split out libibverbs to a core sub package for libpcap IB support to minimise deps for users that don't require IB support
Well that's a packaging issue so it's not something that would normally go upstream, or does upstream have a spec file that you are using?
I mean I absolutely agree that it shouldn't have been done using PP powers without at least trying to talk to the package maintainers first if that is what happened, but it doesn't look like something where upstreaming is a concern.
Tom