https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336008 Rob Crittenden <rcritten@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|apevec@xxxxxxxxxx |rcritten@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #3 from Rob Crittenden <rcritten@xxxxxxxxxx> --- I'm confused about the naming. Why not put the _bindir files into keycloak-httpd-client-install and keep the python parts in subpackages or is it because it would be confusing to install a subpackage to get the top-level package? It would seem better to me to put the common things into keycloak-httpd-client-install and leave the python parts broken out. License does match source, MIT vs GPLv3 rm %{buildroot}/usr/bin/keycloak-httpd-client-install should be rm %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/keycloak-httpd-client-install man pages should not be %doc man page is not installed in python3 subpackage Missing %dir for %{_datadir}/python-%{srcname} Issues with man page (man --warnings keycloak-httpd-client-install.8 >/dev/null) <standard input>:8: warning: macro `Bkeycloak-httpd-client-install' not defined <standard input>:174: warning: macro `BDetermining' not defined Not sure I like the glob for _bindir given there is a single file. Why not just list the one file? Did upstream release 0.2 include only the man page? Wondering if the upgrade to upstream should also be mentioned in changelog. -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx