https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1092149 Ben Nemec <bnemec@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(bnemec@xxxxxxxxxx | |) | --- Comment #3 from Ben Nemec <bnemec@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the review. Some responses: * I will bump the diskimage-builder version used. I just didn't realize .14 was released yet. * I don't know what upstream will do with the versioning on this new project/package, so I figured I would start at 0.0.1 and if they decide to match diskimage-builder then I can always bump the rpm version too. If I start at 0.1.14 and they decide to go with 0.0.1 I think that would be a problem. * There's a bit of a timing issue with version capping the conflict, at least until I know which release of diskimage-builder is going to have dib-run-parts removed. I could remove dib-run-parts in the diskimage-builder spec, but then diskimage-builder would have a dependency on this package, so this has to be available before any package of diskimage-builder that doesn't include dib-run-parts. It's doable, but possibly more complicated since this is a new package? So I guess it would be a little simpler to wait and resolve the conflict once the upstream split happens, but I think I could do it now too if that would be preferable. I'm not sure how big a deal the unversioned conflict is. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review