https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39859
--- Comment #13 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net --- (In reply to Shmerl from comment #12)
So is there some reason not to package it?
If you look at the previous discussion, what started as a simple package containing the .msi morphed into issues of naming different versions for each branch, and then including the mono version in the name of each package as well, so they could be installed alongside each other. I agree the latter is a good idea, but on the OBS that would entail creating a new package for each new wine-mono version, as opposed to simply updating the version number of an existing package. In addition, a few years ago wine-mono was changed to offer both shared installs and prefix local installs, adding two more flavors of every type of package.
In addition, much of my original rationale for suggesting this is gone. Downloading became more reliable once the source was moved from Sourceforge to the WineHQ server, and users have become accustomed to not having wine-mono and wine-gecko packages--you are the first person in years to ask for this.
For me it's simply more work than I have time to deal with, with no real need. I've left the bug open in case anyone else wants to take it on.