[arch-general] Upstream bugs, patches

[Loui]

On Thu, 1 May 2008 22:43:29 +0200
Nagy Gabor <ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:

> So the question: Do/Should Archlinux packagers apply unofficial or
> merged-but-not-yet-released patches to fix an existing _bug_ of a
> released package?
I don't see anything wrong with applying a patch, but it shouldn't just
be applied and left to sit there. The patch should be sent upstream as
well.

> If the answer no, do packagers forward the bug to the official developer
> or the end-user should forward his discovered bug?
Even if the answer is 'yes' I think the bug and patches should still be
forwarded. In an ideal world a packager should follow the package's
development upstream and have some communication with it's developers.

If there are lingering bugs, the project has become stagnant and there
is no one to commit changes and release a new version then I would
consider taking the package out of the repo altogether. Move it to
unsupported.

Another issue here is if the project has some
philosophical/technical/other issues with the patch. There's no easy
solution here. That's something that has to be considered on a case by
case basis. If it's bad enough, someone might decide to fork. :D

It's good to make upstream problems known. Users and developers should
work to fix the problems from the source rather than only patching
things locally. Imagine how many more users from all distros will
benefit if things are patched upstream. It's the user's job as well as
the developers' to bug upstream once he or she knows the facts.