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=570424 --- Comment #12 from Satya Komaragiri <satya.komaragiri@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-07 07:08:53 EDT --- Thank you for the feedback :) (In reply to comment #10) > You are right, it's up to the packager, but here are some more things I'd like > to point out: > > The versioning of the package is IMO wrong. The release 0.1git... indicates > that it is a pre-release and a final version is still to come, but upstream > does no releases and uses git only for hosting. Thus the package can simply be > called 0.5.5-3 > Corrected. > On the other hand the spec lacks a comment how to regenerate the exact source > that was used. Upstream is already at 0.56 now, so there should be a comment > how to get 0.5.5. See > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control > Corrected > VCS keys would be nice too, although they are not yet ratified by FESCo. See > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Walters/Packaging_VCS_key_proposal > Added > Last but not least the requires for transmission-deamon should IMHO be > versioned since the program only supports >= 1.80 but we have older versions in > the 'everything' repos. Corrected. The updated spec file can be found at http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/transmission-remote-cli.spec The new SRPM is at http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/transmission-remote-cli-0.5.5-4.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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review