https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2291346
--- Comment #8 from Cristian Le <[email protected]> --- > I don't target EPEL9. Do you have any source of that information? Personal experience [1,2]. But it's more of cautionary that there can be subtle differences in the git archive vs pypi_source. > Oh. I didn't know it. Thanks. On one hand it would be good to have 0.5.13 but > on the other there are some fixes like this one Ideally the relevant patches are cherry-picked instead. You can easily create them by adding a `.patch` at the end of a github URL [3] (these are compatible with pypi_source btw). Would be even good to use that as a `Source` url also, but put in a readable name for it if you do that way. This approach balances better the intention of upstream to distribute a stable release and the need to backport some relevant fixes (the example commit shown only affected the examples which are not being packaged or used in the testing afaik) [1]: https://github.com/teemtee/fmf/pull/202#discussion_r1611665924 [2]: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/packit/teemtee-fmf-202/build/7481277/ [3]: https://github.com/ActivityWatch/aw-client/commit/7e12bf2c9727b6abba01e36669c04ebc69b5c89a.patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2291346 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202291346%23c8 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
