Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 03. 10. 22 12:09, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> And how is this change related to: >> >> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpmlint/c/2beb19345e6644cb1b5ee8092b8533c8984cd21c?branch=rawhide > > I was unaware of this change at all. > > Tom, should rpmlint ditch that file instead and Require > rpmlint-fedora-license-data? I'm not Tom (and I have not been asked to play Tom on TV), but I think that sounds like a good plan. Maintaining this data in two places is at least one more place than we'd like to have to maintain it. Thanks for working on automatic generation of the license data in rpmlint format Miro! And thanks to Miroslav and everyone who has worked on fedora-license-data. Hooray for not having to screen scrape the wiki for license data! Mildly related, I've been working on getting rpmlint updated to 2.3.0 and now 2.4.0. I filed a PR to get comments from other rpmlint maintainers and (hopefully) catch any bugs I may have introduced: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpmlint/pull-request/27 -- Todd
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
