https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836617
--- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Igor Raits from comment #3)
> - subpackage for the binary is called "pommes", but
the binary name is "mvn-genbr", I think those two names should match
Not really, I think it is better to call it pommes, because that is how
people would theoretically install it via cargo: `cargo install pommes`
would give them mvn-genbr.
I was thinking more along the lines of "BuildRequires: mvn-genbr", which makes
a lot more sense than "BuildRequires: pommes" when you want mvn-genbr for your
build.
> - no License tag for the binary subpackage that contains the
effective license for the binary
I had this done locally, but seems forgot updating remove spec. Done now.
Great, will do the complete review shortly.
--
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