Ideally, we'd wait for the next release. Next best would be if the maintainer applied
the patch in the mean time. Since that hasn't happened, someone with provenpackager
rights with an interest in a health Doom ecosystem could add the patch and push a build
for f32.
So I will. :)
--
Gwyn Ciesla
she/her/hers
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, March 19, 2020 1:11 PM, Jordan Christiansen <xordspar0(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I noticed that chocolate-doom wasn't showing up in the package
search results, so I decided to look into why and help out if I could.
When the Fedora 32 mass rebuild happened, chocolate doom failed to
build[1] because of changes in the default settings in GCC 10. I submitted a patch to
upstream to fix it and it was accepted to master. Now I want to make sure that the package
makes it into Fedora 32. What needs to be done to make that happen? What is the policy for
packages that fail to build? What's the deadline for getting it fixed? If upstream
doesn't cut a release before the deadline, should we carry my patch downstream?
packaging mailing list -- packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
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/packaging@lists.fedoraproje...