https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836617 --- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Igor Raits from comment #3) > > - subpackage for the binary is called "pommes", but the binary name is "mvn-genbr", I think those two names should match > Not really, I think it is better to call it pommes, because that is how > people would theoretically install it via cargo: `cargo install pommes` > would give them mvn-genbr. I was thinking more along the lines of "BuildRequires: mvn-genbr", which makes a lot more sense than "BuildRequires: pommes" when you want mvn-genbr for your build. > > - no License tag for the binary subpackage that contains the effective license for the binary > I had this done locally, but seems forgot updating remove spec. Done now. Great, will do the complete review shortly. -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
