https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1667725 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Boost may be peculiar but that doesn't invalidate anything I said: Naming the package boots169 is inconsistent with the packaging guidelines. The other packages are also misnamed, but their existence doesn't excuse including additional misnamed packages. You still aren't required to submit a review request. It's fine if you want to do that, of course; I'm not going to stop you. But you could have simply submitted the new package request under the exception policy for different versions of existing packages and have had it imported, built and on its way to stable by now. I guess it's good that you did, though, or I wouldn't have noticed and had a chance to correct the improper naming. -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
