Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libGLw https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188974 j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx 2006-08-18 18:19 EST ------- About the whole obsoletes discussion, since mesa-libGLw is in FC-5 already (mesa-)libGLw can be introduced into FE for FE-6 at its earliest, FE-6 should only be used with FC-6 in which case all those obsoletes for packages which we haven't shipped for a while can be dropped, since those will all have been replaced with newer packages already because they are obsoleted by packages in FC-6. So depending on the name we should include an Obsoletes: mesa-libGLw (if we choice libGLw as name), or no obsoletes at all. Which name is the best depends on if we are planning to ever ship an alternative libGLw if the answer is most likely not, then libGLw is the best name IMHO. Last about the discussion of the conditional building with / without somestuff, I would personally prefer to see it removed but I won't insist. The same goes for the dri stuff, AFAIK that is irrelevant for this package when build without the rest of Mesa and thus should preferably be removed. when it comes to spec files less often is more. I also have a question, who is the submitter of this package review? I assume its ajax (ajackson@xxxxxxxxxx), but some of the comments above have confused me. Rex (Dieter) in the light of the openmotif saga it would be nice to get this into extras soon, I asume you're astill going todo the review? Maybe you can post a short list of must and should fix items so that Ajax can have a go at those. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review