https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805928
--- Comment #12 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Artem from comment #11)
(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #3)
> Why are you arbitrarily inventing an "elementary-" prefix for the package
> name?
Because there is already exist 'planner' package
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/planner
Also there is no any special Elementary guidelines in Fedora and how
elementary packages MUST named.
Uh ... that's my point, it's *not* an elementary project.
It's a third-party project, that doesn't have "elementary" anywhere in
its
name.
I know that "planner" is a really generic name that's likely to lead to
name
clashes (as it does in this case), but that doesn't mean you can just
"invent"
a name prefix.
> And why are you arbitrarily building this with -flto?
Why you not ask why arbitrarily mozjs [1] and firefox built with -flto and
why LTO by default proposed in F32 [2]?
> Packages should be built with fedora default build flags ...
This package built with default fedora build flags. Additional build flags
not prohibited, i asked this many times other maintainers.
Fair enough, but the packaging Guidelines still specify that you should
document *why* you're modifying build flags.
The Change about enabling LTO by default also has no bearing on this, because
it would change the *default* build flags, and thereby *by definiton* moving
the goalpost for everybody.
--
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