https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|package-review@lists.fedora |
|project.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dewachter.jonat...@gmail.co
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #18 from Fedo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
ell-0-0.2.20130617svn.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ell-0-0.2.20130617svn.fc18
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
ell-0-0.2.20130617svn.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ell-0-0.2.20130617svn.fc19
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=O9nixkd0Gh&a=cc_unsubscribe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--
You are receiving this ma
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ fedora-cvs?
--- Comm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #785775|review+ |
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla ---
fedora-review flag not set to '+'
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=50Bwppjbgx&a=cc_unsubscribe
_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Jonathan De Wachter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
You are receivin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan De Wachter ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: ell
Short Description: Header-only C++ library to write EBNF grammars
Owners: sonkun
Branches: f18 f19
InitialCC: mschwendt echevemaster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #785775||review+
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
--- Comment #10 from Michael Schwe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan De Wachter ---
> Another header-only API has come up, metslib in bug 993456, and there I
> thought, why not set "BuildArch: noarch" for the -devel subpackage?
>
> What do you think?
In the absolute, the packaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #7 from Michael Schwendt ---
Another header-only API has come up, metslib in bug 993456, and there I
thought, why not set "BuildArch: noarch" for the -devel subpackage?
What do you think?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Y
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan De Wachter ---
> Why the triple '0'? Why not a single '0'?
I thought explicit would be better than implicit, that's now fixed :)
> I don't think this is a good version for release, if you don't have a stable
> r
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt ---
> We can
Ah, that's the connection between "can" => "shouldn't".
Yes, it would be possible to not build "ell-devel" but just "ell". There are no
naming guidelines about it. The FPC considers it okay wh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng ---
We can keep them in main package I think. And just add virtual provides.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt ---
> IMO you shouldn't add subpackage
Why not?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IIO5XL8ljM&a=
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cicku...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
--- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt ---
> extra care when reviewing its SPEC file
Not really. Header-only C/C++ APIs aren't so special. It's just that there
isn't much in the packaging guidelines. Also, there have been package
submissions th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=993324
Jonathan De Wachter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
--
You
26 matches
Mail list logo
