Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510822
--- Comment #4 from Tim Fenn <fenn(a)stanford.edu> 2009-07-11 17:41:40 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I'm a bit confused about the versioning. Is the "-1"
in the tarball
indicative of some sub-version thing? Will they release 0.2-2 in the
future? What would you call this package in that case? Upstream also
produces RPMs and seems to use the dashed portion of the version as their
Release: (or perhaps that's just coincidental), but it should be obvious that
we can't do that.
I'm not sure what that indicates, and its entirely reasonable to assume a
"-2"
version will be made at some point. Is it possible/OK to just transmogrify
"0.2-1" into "0.2.1"? Perhaps its best to ask upstream WTF that
number
represents?
The blank line at the start of %description does make it into the
final package
and should probably be removed.
done.
Did you intend not to build and package the documentation? It seems
like that
would be a good idea, but I haven't checked that the documentation is actually
useful.
Oh, yeah - i kind of whipped this up in a jif so I could test the apbs builds I
was doing - I'll add that in.
Why does this require pkgconfig? I don't see any .pc files in
the package.
Oops - removed.
The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.
When I get enough free time, I'll jump in! :)
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.