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=506339 --- Comment #4 from Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> 2009-06-17 12:25:05 EDT --- I think obsoleting lzma-libs and lzma-devel is definitely premature, and providing them is wrong and should never happen (obsoletion _only_ without provides when the time is right to drop lzma). xz-libs does *not* provide the stuff in lzma-libs (liblzmadec) and xz-devel does not IIRC provide the headers and pkgconfig file that lzma-devel does, and we have packages depending on both in the repo, at least libarchive, never mind people's local builds against lzma-libs/-devel. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages Yes, "beta" should be in the release tag. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages -- 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