Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: clearsilver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529
bugzilla(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|fedora-extras- |
|list(a)redhat.com |
CC| |fedora-package-
| |review(a)redhat.com
CC|fedora-package- |
|review(a)redhat.com |
CC| |fedora-extras-
| |list(a)redhat.com
Severity|normal |medium
Priority|normal |medium
jkeating(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jkeating(a)redhat.com
Flag| |fedora-cvs?
------- Additional Comments From jkeating(a)redhat.com 2007-06-01 17:05 EST -------
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: clearsilver
New Branches: EL-4 EL-5
Current owner approved me to own package for EPEL
From:
"Jeffrey C. Ollie" <jeff(a)ocjtech.us>
To:
Jesse Keating <jkeating(a)redhat.com>
Date:
Today 16:29:32
Message was signed with unknown key 0xAED93BC72C884111.
The validity of the signature cannot be verified.
Status: No public key to verify the signature
On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 15:17 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
I'd like clearsilver in EPEL, so that I can use Trac in EPEL.
Would you be
opposed to me branching these and building them for EPEL?
Nope... go right ahead.
Jeff
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.