GRUB menu hidden by default?

[Kamil Paral]

> Here's what our policies say:
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
> 
> "All patches should have an upstream bug link or comment
> 
> All patches in Fedora spec files SHOULD have a comment above them
> about
> their upstream status. Any time you create a patch, it is best
> practice
> to file it in an upstream bug tracker, and include a link to that in
> the
> comment above the patch."
> 
> This is based on (and links to)
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects :
> 
> "The Fedora Project focuses, as much as possible, on not deviating
> from
> upstream in the software it includes in the repository. The following
> guidelines are a general set of best practices, and provide reasons
> why
> this is a good idea, tips for sending your patches upstream, and
> potential exceptions Fedora might make. The primary goal is to share
> the
> benefits of a common codebase for end users and developers while
> simultaneously reducing unnecessary maintenance efforts."
> 
> i.e., we try to avoid carrying patches permanently downstream, except
> in
> cases where we obviously have to patch something which it would not
> be
> appropriate to upstream (say, adding a Fedora logo to the login
> screen,
> or something).

Actually there are cases where upstream intentionally provides something configurable, and it has to pick one of the options as the default one, but that doesn't mean it _insists_ on it. The purpose of having it configurable (not hard-coded) is for distributions to adjust it as they see fit.

So while this 'close to upstream' approach makes sense when it comes to patching source code, it may not make much sense when it comes to patching default options in configuration files or various templates.

My comment is not related to GRUB, I haven't studied the issue closely and I don't know which of the cases is it. I just wanted to comment on the principle you cited.