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=498736 --- Comment #6 from David Sugar <dyfet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-02 14:42:25 EDT --- Yes, we share the same upstream. Actually there was also a request to change the package name to ucommon because of some trademark dispute with someone who (much later, as in mid 2006) created an entirely new package they also called "Common C++" (GNU Common C++ has been in continual use since 1999/2000), and the FSF does not wish to fight the issue. Hence all upstreams will likely migrate to the ucommon name at some point... I have uploaded updates that should cover all initial issues raised: http://www.gnutelephony.org/specs/ucommon.spec http://www.gnutelephony.org/specs/ucommon-2.0.5-1.src.rpm I also put what will be the sipwitch spec I will submit up there to, after covering the issues raised here in that one also in advance: http://www.gnutelephony.org/specs/sipwitch.spec http://www.gnutelephony.org/specs/ucommon-2.0.5-1.src.rpm That one is more complicated, as it has swig and plugins... -- 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