https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2013814 kchim@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(bcl@xxxxxxxxxx) CC| |bcl@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from kchim@xxxxxxxxxx --- @bcl@xxxxxxxxxx Regarding this comment, >>> The biggest problem I see is that the package isn't using the same source tarfile from upstream, it looks like it has been modified and repackaged. When possible upstream releases should be used as-is, and modified by the %prep stage in the spec or by applying patches. I am not sure I understand the problem. I thought I already specified the upstream source in the spec file already. Could you give a bit more context? Here is my actual spec file: >>> Name: libxo Version: 1.6.0 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: A Library for Generating Text, XML, JSON, and HTML Output License: BSD URL: https://github.com/Juniper/libxo Source0: https://github.com/Juniper/libxo/releases/download/1.6.0/libxo-1.6.0.tar.gz Patch0: libxo-1.6.0-sysctl.patch .... >>> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2013814 _______________________________________________ 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
