https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040517 --- Comment #81 from Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan@xxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Paulo Andrade from comment #80) > (In reply to Milan Bouchet-Valat from comment #78) > > Great! Thank you Paulo, and all the people who helped me finish this Julia > > package, and by the way learn RPM packaging. :-) > > You're welcome :) > > > I've now removed objects.inv and added the .desktop file (I needed to > > install icons to /usr/share/icons/ and to ship the SVG too to get a > > good-looking icon in GNOME Shell). > > Ok. You can actually suggest upstream to provide a .desktop > and icons for menus, but the scalable SVG should be better for > most modern desktops. Sure, will do. > > A final question: would it be a good idea to make -common and -doc depend on > > the base package, so that you remove all of them at the same time and don't > > get version discrepancies? That would prevent installing the docs without > > Yes it should. Actually I did check that, but only verified > that the -doc package was requiring the base one and did not > fool proof check the others, so I did not notice that the > -common was missing the requires. OK, I'll fix that. Looks like Julia 0.3.1 is planned for tomorrow, so I may as well wait for it before sending the package to updates. -- 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