R P Herrold wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Brandon Davidson wrote:
I'm moving this here from from the QA list. For those who missed the original thread, it's linked from the bug report.
Not fixing the subject, sadly. no RPM issue here; possibly a patching strategy issue in specspo
I kept the subject (and hopefully the references too) in hopes that it might keep the threading for anyone that was following it across lists. If you want to change the header, this might be more helpful (and a little less reproachful too).
and a couple more things jump out at me. By and large, I see NO dark art here, requiring that such a review and proposed fix cannot be done by anyone, diffing the present upstream original and the last shipped patches (once CentOS variant SRPMs are retrievable), and ...
Hey, just because I have time to track it down for a user on the forum and file a bug doesn't mean I have time to fix it ;) I agree, though, it doesn't look too difficult to correct the immediate issue. It looks like the original patch is from hughesjr; I'll keep an eye out for the 5.3 SRPMs and submit a patch if I have time.
frankly, who _cares_ to install packages which ** cannot ** work as upstream does not release the server side sources for the RHN, such that we cannot replicate it (it not being clear that we have a desire as a project to so proceed)
My point was that we are providing translations for packages that we don't ship, and contributing to the confusion of users that do install those packages on their own. IMHO the 'right' thing do to would be to make sure that any package listed as removed in the CentOS release notes is also stripped out of the translations.
For bonus points, we could also make sure that any other changes made to descriptions or summaries are synchronized into specspo; this would probably require checking the packages listed in the release notes' modified list, comparing them to what's in specspo, and running them past the translation team as necessary.
This of course assumes that Red Hat keeps specspo relatively up to date with the actual packages' text, which may be a lot to assume.