https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1079064
Dennis Payne <du...@identicalsoftware.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Review Request: btbuilder - |Review Request: btbuilder -
|Open source implementation |Role-playing game
|of the Bard's Tale |construction set in the
|Construction Set |style of the Bard's Tale
| |Construction Set
--- Comment #5 from Dennis Payne <du...@identicalsoftware.com> ---
I don't like that summary because btbuilder does more than the Bard's Tale
Construction Set. How about "Role-playing game construction set in the style of
the Bard's Tale Construction Set"? I should improve the desrcription as well.
I'm using desktop-file-install in the Makefile. Is that considered bad? Should
I move it to the install section of the spec? Do I need to do
desktop-file-validate since I'm using install?
I don't understand Adrien's comments on requires. According to the guidelines:
RPM has very good capabilities of automatically finding dependencies for
libraries and eg. Perl modules. In short, don't reinvent the wheel, but just
let rpm do its job. There is usually no need to explicitly list
I believe all my library uses will be detected by RPM.
The GPLv2+ issue is being looked into. When I added the images all the code was
mine so I could make an exception for the images. With the addition of the mng
code that isn't possible.
Sorry about not using my real name on the bugzilla account. I created it a long
time ago and didn't see the point of putting in my name.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
