[bug#66823] [PATCH gnome-team v5 2/6] [WIP] gnu: feedbackd: Update to 0.2.1.

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Am Dienstag, dem 07.11.2023 um 10:45 -0500 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
> Hi Liliana,
> 
> Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Am Dienstag, dem 31.10.2023 um 20:34 +0100 schrieb Vivien Kraus:
> > > * gnu/packages/gnome.scm (feedbackd): Update to 0.2.1.
> > > (inputs): Add gmobile.
> > > * gnu/packages/patches/feedbackd-use-system-gmobile.patch: New
> > > file.
> > > * gnu/packages/gnome.scm (feedbackd) [patches]: Use it here.
> > > * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Register it here.
> > > * gnu/packages/gnome.scm (feedbackd) [snippet]: Remove the
> > > gmobile
> > > submodule.
> > > 
> > > Change-Id: I06521c1673efb6aea1d163410fdf3d0206b57d8a
> > > ---
> > Reworded locally to
> > 
> > * gnu/packages/patches/feedbackd-use-system-gmobile.patch: New
> > file.
> > * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Register it here.
> > * gnu/packages/gnome.scm (feedbackd): Update to 0.2.1.
> > [origin]<patches>: Add “feedbackd-use-system-gmobile.patch”.
> > <snippet>: Remove the gmobile submodule.
> > [inputs]: Add gmobile.
> > 
> > IMHO it's not a hard requirement that you submit this upstream
> > before pushing, so take your time with the account.  That being
> > said, I will need to rely on CI for builds on this series, because
> > I also have a local world rebuild for this weekend.
> 
> On that topic: I like to think that upstreamable changes *should* be
> forwarded upstream; as the alternative is maintaining our own growing
> set of custom patches forever, which is not sustainable.
I agree; under the RFC 2119 definition of SHOULD.

Cheers