I've agreed to give the merge review of flex (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225758) a once over, since there was confusion about whether it had been reviewed and approved. The package is clean, and given that it's obviously a development-only package it gets a pass on things like including header files in the main package. However, it also includes a static library, libfl.a, which every flex-using application links against. And according to our guidelines, this needs an ack from FESCo. I can't imagine that we'd break every flex-using application by changing the way it works, but I figure it's better to follow proper procedure here. So, comments? - J< -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
