https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049400
--- Comment #15 from Nikola Forró <nforro(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Dominik Wombacher from comment #14)
True, so from a packaging Guideline perspective this falls then
somehow
under
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_packaging_sta... ?
Or is it bundled when it's linked against fedora external packages/sources
and static libraries if they exist as package in fedora?
I'm not sure to be honest, but I think it still falls under bundling.
Yes it is, I guess that's why I was a bit confused about your
comment that
packaging of aws-c-cal shouldn't proceed.
Right, sorry, I didn't mean I have anything against packaging aws-c-cal
separately, but I was under the impression that David initially intended to
package aws-crt-python the "proper" way and this review request was the first
step toward that, and when that idea was abandoned and aws-crt-python packaged
the way it is, the review request no longer made sense.
So that means, there is no reason not to finalize the process and
add
aws-c-cal to the already created repo?
And we should actually do the same with the rest of the libraries and if
possible use them during package building?
I would say so.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049400
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...