https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301143 --- Comment #21 from Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antonio Murdaca from comment #16) > I've created https://github.com/runcom/fedora-pkgs where I do have .spec(s) > and SRPM(s) > I'm planning to remove the .spec from the source repo and maintain the .spec > at > https://github.com/runcom/fedora-pkgs/tree/master/skopeo/fedora/skopeo FWIW, Fedora's packaging repository will keep its own copy in a branch for each Fedora release (see repositories at http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/ for examples). > This license stuff is tricky...I've re-licensed my tool with ASL 2.0 since > all my vendors are ASL 2.0 afaict. Yeah, that should be accurate either way. > I've added the removal of vendor/ when %{with_bundled} is 0 > Right now, unluckily, this tool won't build from debundled vendor's copies, > and > also not all vendors are already in Fedora - but I'm working on packaging > them > with Lokesh and Jan for a future version Understood, it's a work in progress. > should I call `make clean` to remove generated files in a %clean section? Historically, %clean's job was to clean up $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, way back when even using a buildroot was optional. Now that the buildroot is set and cleaned up by default, Fedora doesn't expect you to have a %clean section. -- 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