https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1004231
Nils Philippsen <nphil...@redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Nils Philippsen <nphil...@redhat.com> ---
Regarding the name, I concur having a common namespace for lv2 packages is a
good idea. Would you please bring this up with the Packaging Committee to make
this an official standard? --
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_Committee -- thanks.
Diff to comment #4:
...
[!]: License confusion in the README aside, the package should really package
the correct version of the GPL (i.e. v3, not v2).
...
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
...
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane.
...
--> Providing you include the correctly versioned license text, this package is
APPROVED.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
