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=455226 --- Comment #10 from Pavel Alexeev <pahan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-22 18:06:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > > No, duedlines say what CVS, not released versions must start from 0. > Definitely, I can't agree. > Version 0.9 have been published on 2006-06-06 > So this is a post-release version > Read : > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages Ok, you are right. Version release enumaration changed. > I prefer using %{name}.xml rather than %{peclName}.xml (or %{peclName}2.xml) > (see recent approved changes in PHP Guidelines, this is to avoid possible > conflicts between pecl, pear and other channel extensions). Ok, let it be so. > I need to search if %verify(not md5 mtime size) is acceptable in the > Guidelines... > > Is the spec encoding ok ? It seems there is UTF-8 (ru sumnary) and ISO (pl > sumnary) which make my text editor crazy ? Polish summary and description recoded from iso8859-2 to UTF-8. > $ file php-pecl-runkit.spec > php-pecl-runkit.spec: Non-ISO extended-ASCII text, with LF, NEL line > terminators Now: $ file php-pecl-runkit.spec php-pecl-runkit.spec: UTF-8 Unicode text http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/php-pecl-runkit/php-pecl-runkit-0.9-7.CVS20090215.fc9.src.rpm -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review