New package from one source

[Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
>> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
>>>
>>>> As I mention above, what about your first link - main apache rpm 
>>>> package fully ignore this guidelines!
>>  >
>>> These are more best practises and aren't part oaf the packaging 
>>> guidelines except as a reference but maintainers have to ultimately 
>>> make their own decisions. If you find major deviations from upstream, 
>>> it is useful to talk to the maintainers and understand why.
>> Off course, you talk about "maintainers have to ultimately make their 
>> own decisions." but forbidden this right for the Fedora users who want 
>> use mpm-itk for example??
> 
> I haven't really forbidden anything. Not my call anyway. I am just 
> explaining to you why things are the way, they are. Maintainers 
> decisions are going to be constrained by existing guidelines for Fedora 
> including licensing etc. This isn't free for all space.
I do not see any legal issues here. And also not found any guidelines 
about this situation when two (several) packages will include one 
source. This is a reason why I ask it question here.

>> In other words, if I (or any other) make "Apache fork", copy it 
>> source, patch with this patch and pack in separate source tarball on 
>> separate URL (on Sourceforge or any else) you are accept such package 
>> into Fedora???
> Again not my call but forks of projects are generally allowed 
> independently c.f emacs vs xemacs.

Ok, ok. But why this is likely when initial case with patch without 
intermediate steps like pseudo-forks?
Pseudo, because I it will not be intended for any innovations except one 
patch and presupposes sync witch upstream developing of the both projects?