Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: file-roller https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225751 toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |197974 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-08 21:55 EST ------- #1 Please give me some arguments as to why it's an unnecessary requirement. Without arguments, it's going to fail to pass the committee. With arguments it may or may not pass but at least it'll be considered. #2 Given your relation with upstream on Mozilla we could use the snapshot method from #3 or the unwritten sources-only-in-srpm policy. Let me know which one would be preferable. #3 I thought was taken care of in the rules for snapshots. However, I'm unable to find any snapshot guidelines on the wiki. Looks like it's been an undocumented guideline passed down on the mailing lists. Basically, you have to give the commands to generate the source tarball from the repo in a comment or provide a script which can generate the tarball. Snapshots also use a date in the release tag which you may or may not like. I'll write up the snapshot guideline and propose it since this is something that we've been doing for a while. Let me know if I need to put my head together with jeremy and expedite the "sources only in srpm" policy as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review