https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1982306 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Ruzicka <jakub.ruzicka@xxxxxx> --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #2) > > It would probably be better to update libyang to v2 and then build a > libyang1 compat package that doesn't ship the tools. Probably better how/why? This naming convention was chosen after a discussion with both upstream and the Debian package maintainer as a least problematic transition with same package names across distros given the incompatibility between v1 and v2 (which IMHO warrants separate packages). Considering your suggestion, where would the libyang1 compat package live? In libyang2 distgit/branch? In a separate libyang1 distgit/branch? > > Also, this libyang2 package spec massively fails to comply with our > guidelines. It's an upstream compromise that works on all distros, I don't expect it to go into Fedora as is. However, I've hoped for specific pointers on howto resolve the most pressing issues such a v1 vs v2 naming, Conflicts (which Fedora guidelines advise against) or other fundamental issues. I can fix the upstream source URL, changelog and other nits fedora-review tool points out at any time, but it's pointless without addressing the core issues mentioned before. If you care to elaborate on the most important steps required to make the .spec comply with Fedora guidelines, I'm happy to carry those changes out. Upstream is cooperative as well. The .spec is ~80 lines and there exists a finite sequence of edits that lead to a Fedora-compliant .spec. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
