https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032487 --- Comment #5 from Susi Lehtola <susi.lehtola@xxxxxx> --- > > and modify the package accordingly. Please provide a MPICH version as well. > There is really no mpi "version" merely mpi-enabled gromacs and espressomd > are used during testing, but we could also just disable these test. Oh, in that case it's fine... Just document it better in the spec :) > > Also, is this not supposed to be a re-review instead of a review? > I wasn't sure, so many things are different. What is the guidance on that? If the packages are already in the repo, this is a re-review. I don't honestly know, it's been years since I've handled one the last time. The main thing to check and test is just that the upgrade paths work. Have you had any thoughts about semantic versioning? Forcing yearly soname bumps and rebuilds may get annoying... -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2032487 _______________________________________________ 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
