https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242859 --- Comment #5 from Jeremy Newton <alexjnewt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Some thoughts though: Why not merge macros and modules together? Since they use the same source, it seems more logical to me and reduces the update churn. I.e. make the module package a subpackage of this. I also suggest that you tag the source, for cleaner packaging and easier viewing on github. In hindsight, I'm not sure I'm 100% keen on doing the rocm_release/rocm_patch macros in macros.rocm, as it makes it less clear what release is being build in the rocm hip libs spec files. If you insist on them, I'd recommend generating the them in this spec file instead, e.g. in %prep or %build (you could make a simple makefile that use templates for example), to reduce code churn when we bump rocm version. -- 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=2242859 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202242859%23c5 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
