The author seems to be complaining that instead of every distro having their own copy of specfiles, the specfiles are semi-shared and use conditional logic to include or exclude components depending on which distribution the package is being built for.

In this particular case a feature should have been disabled on Fedora, but was enabled unconditionally, which caused problems on Fedora.

They seem to be further complaining that when this bug was fixed [0], a condition was added for "fedora" rather than "rhel", meaning that any Fedora derivatives might trip over this issue (because they wouldn't trigger the condition).

But they never made this complaint in the actual Bugzilla [0] where someone could consider their feedback, they skipped straight to the "complain via blog post" phase. Just like they did in their first blog post [1] where they said

>I would file a bug report but I cannot imagine that Fedora would accept it. They already know that this feature doesn't work; it's right there in the DKMS manpage. It's there anyway because, well, I don't know. This is the most user-hostile decision I think I've ever seen Fedora make.

Nevertheless it seems they did file the bug report, and it was accepted, and fixed in less than a week.

My advice to the author is that perhaps they should extend a little more charity and "just ask" first, before they jump at the opportunity to complain in public - without having mentioned the issue to anyone with the ability to fix it.

[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1962841

[1] https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/FedoraWeakUpd...