On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 11:34:09AM +0300, Joonas Niilola wrote: > If you'd like we'd prefer a GitHub pull request where you modify the > ebuild adding this patch, and revbump the ebuild to -r2.
Sure, I can do that. It should be relativiely straightforward since I already have the patch ready. Expect a pr either later tonight or tomorrow. > We should only switch upstreams if there's some clear development done > in a fork - are you aware of any other forks existing, with active > development happening? That makes sense, and in general, I agree with that. There are quite a few forks listed at https://github.com/muennich/physlock/network/members but most of them are either far behind upstream with no changes or are behind + a few commits of their own. Some of the commits were nothing more than code style changes, and some of them were from pull requests that were closed with some of them being closed without being accepted. There was one fork [1] which looked like it had some activity earlier this year, but looking at the pull requests on the upstream repo [2] it looks like the work was actually done towards the end of 2019 and it was just a rebase and force push that was done this year. [1] https://github.com/dexterlb/physlock [2] https://github.com/muennich/physlock/pull/79 So, from what I can tell, it doesn't really seem like there's a lot of development going on anywhere. - Oskari
