https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2296801
--- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Frank Dedden from comment #8) > Nice. What do we do for this release? > > 1. Wait for the release on hackage, and (as an exception) base the package > on the hackage version instead of the stackage release? > 2. Manually adjust the license file or field. This way we would deviate from > upstream. > 3. Just package it as is: it won't be correct, but atleast we stay true to > upstream. This will be fixed when the next version hits stackage. Well I am assuming it would just be a minor version bump. Maybe let's see how long 1 takes. Otherwise maybe a patch from github could be applied I think. From the Fedora perspective I would prefer 1 or patching, that would be better I think. It is okay to use "cabal-rpm spec --stream hackage" in this case, though actually it seems monadLib is not in Stackage currently, so I think cabal-rpm will pick it from Hackage anyway. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2296801 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202296801%23c9 -- _______________________________________________ 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
