Add "downstream only" explanations to various patches

Suggested by Neal Gompa in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774417
This commit is contained in:
Miro Hrončok 2019-11-25 13:20:27 +01:00
parent 853a0fc587
commit 6b5182a34c
1 changed files with 5 additions and 0 deletions

View File

@ -246,6 +246,8 @@ Patch111: 00111-no-static-lib.patch
# 00189 #
# Instead of bundled wheels, use our RPM packaged wheels from
# /usr/share/python-wheels
# Downstream only: upstream bundles
# We might eventually pursuit upstream support, but it's low prio
Patch189: 00189-use-rpm-wheels.patch
# 00251
@ -253,6 +255,7 @@ Patch189: 00189-use-rpm-wheels.patch
# to /usr/local if executable is /usr/bin/python* and RPM build
# is not detected to make pip and distutils install into separate location
# Fedora Change: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Making_sudo_pip_safe
# Downstream only: Awaiting resources to work on upstream PEP
Patch251: 00251-change-user-install-location.patch
# 00274 #
@ -262,6 +265,8 @@ Patch274: 00274-fix-arch-names.patch
# 00328 #
# Restore pyc to TIMESTAMP invalidation mode as default in rpmbubild
# See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/57#comment-27426
# Downstream only: only used when building RPM packages
# Ideally, we should talk to upstream and explain why we don't want this
Patch328: 00328-pyc-timestamp-invalidation-mode.patch
# (New patches go here ^^^)