https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033058 --- Comment #7 from Fernando F. Mancera <ferferna@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Lubomir Rintel from comment #3) > * Package name is correct > * Source matches upstream > * License is good for Fedora > * SPEC is reasonably clean, legible and uses macros consistently > * Builds fine in mock > * Provides/Requires look okay > > Here's a few things that need fixing or explanation: > > 0.) The latest version seems to be 0.2.1. > > Why are you packaging an old one? When I created the BZ this was the latest version. Anyway, I can rebase it later. I don't think this will be a problem at all. As I noticed that for licenses there is already an issue filed https://pagure.io/fedora-rust/rust2rpm/issue/176, could this request be marked as approved? I will discuss the other comments with the upstream community. Thanks! -- 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=2033058 _______________________________________________ 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
