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=530747 --- Comment #11 from Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-09-12 06:05:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > > - it's better to have two binary packages (why should I have client installed > > on server side?) > Why you shouldn't have it? I won't start a holy war here, but look at openssh for example. > > - indentation in the spec is a bit inconsistency: there are few parameters > > which have not enough TABs > See 0 post and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PavelAlexeev/tabsize Again, keep an eye on other packages in Fedora. There is a common sense: if I don't know any standard about something, I look at work which already done. It's so called standard 'de facto'. (Actually on your page the 'cat' usage in sample is useless) > > - there is new version 0.6.0-rc1 > Yes. And it is not stable. Does it fix some critical bugs? It brings speed feature. However, we need a synchronization with other distributions at the same time. So, the proposal is to check them (current unstable versions!) and do the same package in the Fedora. > > - for me the '-c' option in the CFLAGS is odd, I guess the patch of Makefile > > could fix the oddness > I'm do not sure this is bug to report it upstream. Can you say something about > it? Seems as a bug. P.S. ping! -- 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