https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297622
Randy Barlow <rbar...@redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |admil...@redhat.com
Flags| |needinfo?(admiller@redhat.c
| |om)
--- Comment #3 from Randy Barlow <rbar...@redhat.com> ---
Hello Adam!
I believe that the first issue (about not owning the folders) was due to Pulp
platform not having been in Fedora at the time of your review yet. When I run
fedora-review now that Pulp is in Fedora, I do not see those errors.
I removed the defattr statements, and used attr instead in the one place it was
needed.
"Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable." There is not
actually a package called pulp-docker, so I don't think it makes sense for the
subpackages to depend on pulp-docker. Do you agree?
I've gone ahead and packaged a 0.3.beta from upstream that was released this
week and fixed the defattr thing:
Spec URL: https://rbarlow.fedorapeople.org/pulp-docker.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rbarlow.fedorapeople.org/pulp-docker-2.0.0-0.3.beta.1.fc24.src.rpm
--
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
