I'd like to submit a package for HandBrake (http://handbrake.fr). I have a package that compiles well, but uses private libraries. One reason that it does this is to patch in features or patch out bugs not released in upstream yet. HandBrake originally used these private libraries: a52dec-0.7.4.tar.gz + A52_DOLBY patch faac-1.26.tar.gz faad2-2.6.1.tar.gz ffmpeg-r15462.tar.gz, precursor to 0.5 + several patches lame-3.98.tar.gz libdca-r81-strapped.tar.gz + additional ABI changes libdvdread-0.9.7.tar.gz libmkv-0.6.3.tar.gz libmp4v2-r45.tar.gz libogg-1.1.3.tar.gz libsamplerate-0.1.4.tar.gz libtheora-1.0.tar.gz libvorbis-aotuv_b5.tar.gz mpeg2dec-0.5.1.tar.gz + patch x264-r1028-83baa7f.tar.gz + several patches xvidcore-1.1.3.tar.gz + fdct patch In some cases, I was able to just remove the private library, and in other cases I was able to verify upstream had integrated the patches and replace with a newer version. Once instance required patching out minor functionality from HandBrake. In a few cases, I dropped the private library and it's patch hoping that it would not impact the quality of the product. I've even had one success with a downrev. One library has been submitted to Fedora. I'm still left with these five private libraries that seem to be considerably different from upstream (either in snapshot or patches). I'm afraid that removing these actually will impact functionality or stability: a52dec-0.7.4.tar.gz + A52_DOLBY patch ffmpeg-r15462.tar.gz, precursor to 0.5 + several patches libdca-r81-strapped.tar.gz + additional ABI changes libmp4v2-r45.tar.gz x264-r1028-83baa7f.tar.gz + several patches So my question - before submitting a RPM for review: How aggressive should I be in removing private libraries? Should I remove them at the expense of functionality? Or just as many as I can that allows the product to be fully functional?