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=708765 --- Comment #5 from Mario Sanchez Prada <msanchez@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-05-30 15:40:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > [...] > > As you can see, the first paragraph is basically what I pasted you before, with > > the simple addition of "... and group pools" (which would be a nice addition to > > Fedora's description, if you ask me). > > > Yes, you are right. Now I know it again: I had googled for "frogr fedora" and > got the spec file. Don't know the source, but I've downloaded it and began to > edit it to match the new upstream version. In any case, thanks for your hints. Ah, ok. So you started from an old version of the .spec file I was using. That explains everything :-) > I was surprised about the spec file in Git, which shows that you was working > continuously on the Fedora package. And never thought about to publish it...? :-) Yes, I was using the .spec file a lot, at first just to generate .rpm files when I made a release, but very often lately since I switched from Ubuntu to Fedora, to generate pacakges that I could easily install in my system to dog food frogr. However, I never thought about publishing it myself because I had no clue about the .spec file being correct or not. For me it was a "just works" file that easily generated .rpm files when I needed it, without needed to worry too much about being a proper spec file, which would probably need to follow some guidelines/rules/whatever that I, as an unexperienced Fedora user, had no idea about. Actually the initial version of that .spec file was not written by me and I just cared about updating it whenever needed to keep generating rpms when I needed it. Anyway, I agree with you that it's weird to have that .spec file in there and not having pushed for integrating frogr in Fedora before, but as I said in a comment to my last post about frogr, the simple reason for that is that I lacked the self-confidence and the knowledge on the processes in the Fedora community for doing that, so I just went for the "dear lazyweb" approach of asking the world to help me with packaging issues :-) > OK, no problem, once we have a reviewer and all the mistakes related to the > package are fixed, Frogr will become part of the official Fedora package pool. Great! And glad again to see that frogr is reaching fedora in one way or another :-) -- 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