https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1168333 --- Comment #18 from Michael Adam <madam@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #14) > Michael, thanks for the review! A few comments from me ... > > ... > > Thanks for the patches. I merged them into my version: > > Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/vagrant-libvirt.spec > SRPM URL: > http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/vagrant-libvirt-0.0.24-2.fc22.src.rpm Thanks! This looks good to me, except for the open question regarding the policykit rules. > Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8721967 Er... Newbie question: How to you do koji builds without having the SCM yet? > (In reply to James (purpleidea) from comment #13) > > .bashrc_vagrant > > This is missing on purpose. Although it definitely provides useful > utilities, I am not convinced about they comprehensiveness and I am not > convinced they belong in this package. Vagrant itself would be better place, > but I would argue about inclusion as well. Right, I had discussed that with James before but was not fast enough to update this BZ. So this could either go into the main vagrant RPM or into an RPM of its own. > Moreover, they have no upstream, no tests, no documentation, no > specification etc => sooner or later, they will break without notice. > > If you are serious about them, please consider to convince some upstream to > include them in the package. Not sure what would be a good place to upstream this. Keeping that separate, i.e. maintained by James in a separate repo, might make some sense. If this is just some convenience shell foo, the fedora packaging may even be the place to maintain this bashrc snippet. Not sure what to do here. But again, this shouldn't be blocking vagrant-libvirt. > > vagrant-libvirt.pkla > > This was replaced by 10-vagrant-libvirt.rules Right, this should have the same effect. and the .pkla seems to be the more legacy variant. > (although I am still not > convinced we should ship this file, since there are security concerns such > as bug 957300). Apart from clarifying this, the current RPM is reviewed+ by me. -- 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