https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2283055 --- Comment #27 from Attila Kovacs <attipaci@xxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks Mattia, I agree with your assessment. The first package is a little special, because the current upstream release wasn't really designed with packaging in mind. This should be much improved with the next upstream release, scheduled for September 1... In the meantime, I think I'll create a branch from the current `main`, and roll-back the version in `novas.h` to 1.0.1-2 (from 1.0.2-devel). Then use that branch for the .spec, with the matching version number. This should be OK, since the current 'main' is still 100% ABI compatible with 1.0.1... And, I will change 'Recommends' to 'Suggests' as you recommended, since the intention was to make the cio-data sub-package optional. I'll be back with a new spec soon... -- Attila. -- 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=2283055 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202283055%23c27 -- _______________________________________________ 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
