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=510864 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-01 01:00:59 EDT --- I think that the package simply shouldn't have a URL if the URL isn't valid or doesn't have anything to do with the package. You can include a comment referring to the archived site, or even refer to the archived site directly if you like. Of course, the state of the web site begs a more important question: is upstream still around, and if not then are you sure you want to package undeveloped software? Who will handle the bugs? Are you prepared to fork and maintain this software yourself. (Yes, it's just a log colorizer, but someone still has to maintain it.) -- 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