@clime, deleted previous ticket #12 calling me a spammer :-), without politely documenting what's the real reason.

Yes, please, stop spamming the issues here.

I clearly explained the reasons why #11 could not be accepted. The implementation was not complete and it also tried to "bend things over a knee". Trying to make the implementation actually complete would clearly bring even more of those "bending" changes, e.g. duplicating the whole Git's .gitignore's parser in rpkg. That could make the code pretty much unmaintenable.

I added the explicit requires for the tooling that actually has the required functionality:

+ Requires: git >= 2.13
+ Requires: tar >= 1.28

Regrettably, this tooling is not available under EL7 :(. The only reasonable and also user-friendly solution that I see is to create a copr repo that would provide this tooling together with EL7 compatible rpkg-util. If there are users that would like such things, even actually adding python2 back into rpkg if needed.

I am ok with accepting porting patches if they are complete and they don't bring an unreasonable maintenance overhead. This is something that does not need to be documented anywhere, I think.

I am ok with accepting porting patches

No, not my patches at least, and nobody else is OK to contribute here so far.

if they are complete

You should clearly claim what's needed to fix, so far you claimed that
that it can not be fixed :-) that's something I'd never tell.

and they don't bring an unreasonable maintenance overhead

The patch I provided is provable trivial :-). But I can fix anything according
your wishes there... But you refused to discuss, which I take personlly
after several similar conflicts in @copr/copr.

Sorry but I think you are a bit over-sensitive. If you care, make the patch actually fully complete and fully working. Then you can go to people, show them the result, and gather the feedback on it. I think it could at least help clearing things up how they actually are.

I appreciate any contribution but I also need to give people an objective feedback. If you don't believe in my objectivity, do the above suggested thing.

Sorry but I think you are a bit over-sensitive.

I am not, I still wait for your suggestion what should be done properly, and what needs
to be implemented to make that patch acceptable.

I appreciate any contribution

So please discuss, and don't be hostile against me.

This issue has been migrated to GitHub: https://github.com/fedora-copr/rpkg-util/issues/12
Don't forget to subscribe for notifications about new comments.