Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 02/05/2014 11:40 AM, Richard Hughes wrote: >> For stuff like this, I think just getting a provenpackager to fix up >> the packages is the best thing to do. It's obviously correct and a >> simple change. > > Usually yes. But e.g. in rhn-client-tools this path is used in code and the change is non-trivial. It was similar in javapackages-tools. It included a change in documentation which would have most likely been missed by eager provenpackager and maintainers could just ignore a closed bug so this wouldn't have been fixed... Generally filing those 42 (yay, what a nice number) bugs would have been better IMO, but if you are willing to re-run that repoquery in a few months and file bugs for remaining packages I see no harm. -- Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@xxxxxxxxxx> Software Engineer - Developer Experience PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com
Attachment:
pgpEtTJGpE8Ac.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
