https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839480 --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Andy Mender from comment #5) > %global srcname opentelemetry > %global _description %{summary}. > > Name: python-%{srcname} > Version: 0.8.0 > Release: 1%{?dist} > Summary: The OpenTelemetry Python client > > License: ASL 2.0 > URL: https://github.com/open-telemetry/%{srcname}-python/ > Source0: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz > # Fix Python requirement versions > Patch0: %{name}-0.8.0-requirements.patch > > What about using %{version} in the Patch0 entry? Would that make sense? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In a best case scenario this patch would no longer be needed with 0.8.1. If it's not fixed upstream with 0.8.1 then it would require to update the patch and this would increase the amount of work for the update with little to no benefit. -- 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
