https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187082 --- Comment #19 from Jonny Heggheim <jonnyheggheim@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Piotr Popieluch from comment #18) > Looks good, approved. Thanks! > Thing to keep in mind is the non-numeric version number. This is only > allowed when they increment properly otherwise it can cause update issues. I > couldn't find upstreams versioning policy so not sure if it is. I have a bad feeling that there are no versioning policy, the last commit was Mar 8, 2011 and there are no tags/branches in the SVN repo at code.google.com. There are no version info in aes.py (that is the only code in the package). Debian also use 0.1a1 as the version number. I am not sure where the version comes from, it might be the person who uploaded to https://pypi.python.org/pypi/slowaes. > I personally would include the license as a SOURCE, not patch it and I would > use sed to remove the shebang. But this is ok. I was thinking about the same, but I ended up with patches to make it more declarative what is our changes. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx