https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Martin Kho changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lists@gmail.com
--- Comment #17 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jan Grulich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #16 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
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
_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jan Grulich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #15 from Jan Gr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla ---
WARNING: "group::kde-sig" is not a valid FAS account.
--
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
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |
--
You are receiving this mail because
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jan Grulich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #13 from Jan Gr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |
--
You are receiving this mail because
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla ---
WARNING: "@kde-sig" is not a valid FAS account.
--
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
_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jan Grulich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #11 from Jan Gr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla ---
WARNING: "kde-sig" is not a valid FAS account.
--
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
__
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |
--
You are receiving this mail because
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jan Grulich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #9 from Jan Gru
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Rex D
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedorap
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #7 from Jan Grulich ---
Added better description. Regarding the build error, plasma-workspace-devel is
not pushed to a review yet, but will be soon.
Spec URL: https://jgrulich.fedorapeople.org/plasma5/powerdevil.spec
SRPM URL:
htt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter ---
I think that came out wrong... :) to be clear, I mean that items
not-yet-published in packaging guidelines should *not* be considered review
blockers.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter ---
Sure, guidelines are coming, but haven't landed yet. So, I'd urge that items
that are not-yet-in-published guidelines to be considered review blockers.
(Unless it is published already, in which case, givin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru TASAKA ---
See
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2014-May/010157.html
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are al
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter ---
And, fwiw,
using %license macro isn't documented in packaging guidelines, so I wouldn't go
around recommending it's use... yet (unless you can provide references to
work-in-progress packaging guidelines abou
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
--- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter ---
No need for desktop-file-install, there are no .desktop files used for
application menus (ie, nothing is installed under /usr/share/applications/...)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the C
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Miroslav Suchý changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msu...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 fro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175328
Jan Grulich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1135103 (plasma5)
Alias|
24 matches
Mail list logo
