https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967517 Honza Horak <hhorak@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(hhorak@xxxxxxxxxx | |) | --- Comment #3 from Honza Horak <hhorak@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for taking up this review. (In reply to Adam Williamson from comment #1) > I'll take this, since I requested it... > > So, question #1, why the Epoch? If you're thinking you need an epoch because > you want to obsolete a higher-versioned package, I don't think you do. A new > package with a different name can obsolete a higher-versioned old package. OK, I removed "Provides: rdate..." and also Epoch. (In reply to Adam Williamson from comment #2) > License should be "BSD and BSD with advertising" Changed to "BSD and BSD with advertising". Adjusted spec and srpm: Spec URL: http://hhorak.fedorapeople.org/openrdate-review/openrdate.spec SRPM URL: http://hhorak.fedorapeople.org/openrdate-review/openrdate-1.2-2.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UQJ6fiuUPX&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review