https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686506
--- Comment #28 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Jason A. Donenfeld from comment #26)
There seems to be a lot of disconnect here. Essentially, Joe's
been working
on WireGuard on Fedora/RHEL for a really long time and has been intimately
involved with packaging for the process. He knows enormous amounts about
upstream development. Meanwhile eager Fedora packagers have come along,
which is great and encouraging, and there's certainly an opportunity here.
But clearly the approach and the attitude is pretty out of sync with the
expectations of both our tens of thousands of users and of upstream. And the
current direction is not sounding very appealing from a packaging direction
as well.
I'd encourage this approach: close this bug, get Joe started on official
Fedora packaging induction, and when things are ready to go, Joe will open a
new bug report with the package he intends to add. At that time if the OP's
of this bug are interested in helping him out with the package, Joe can use
his judgement.
No worry, I'll see to guide Joe Doss through the sponsorship process as soon as
I have the time. He'll be comaintainer once the package is reviewed.
Congrats on patch v9, I hope it will make it into 5.2.
--
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