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: ladspa-amb-plugins - Ambisonics LADSPA plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=292331 bugs.michael@xxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |bugs.michael@xxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael@xxxxxxx 2007-09-17 16:01 EST ------- Typo in the "amb-plugins" Provides: $ rpm -qp --provides /home/qa/tmp/rpm/RPMS/ladspa-amb-plugins-0.3.0-1.fc8.i386.rpm amb-plugins = 0.3.0=1.fc8 ambisonic1.so ambisonic2.so ladspa-amb-plugins = 0.3.0-1.fc8 Suggesting you replace 'I use' with 'to use' in the %description With the Provides in the Obsoletes/Provides pair you practically occupy the "amb-plugins" namespace. Is this really necessary to keep both package names when this is a new-entry in Fedora? Else it's approved packaging- and licencing-wise. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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