Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clearsilver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174529 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list@xxxxxxxxxx | CC| |fedora-package- | |review@xxxxxxxxxx CC|fedora-package- | |review@xxxxxxxxxx | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list@xxxxxxxxxx Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-cvs? ------- Additional Comments From jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-01 17:05 EST ------- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: clearsilver New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Current owner approved me to own package for EPEL From: "Jeffrey C. Ollie" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> To: Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Today 16:29:32 Message was signed with unknown key 0xAED93BC72C884111. The validity of the signature cannot be verified. Status: No public key to verify the signature On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 15:17 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > I'd like clearsilver in EPEL, so that I can use Trac in EPEL. Would you be > opposed to me branching these and building them for EPEL? Nope... go right ahead. Jeff -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review