[Bug 2292255] Review Request: tailscale - Tailscale VPN Client built around WireGuard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2292255



--- Comment #7 from Carl George 🤠 <carl@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
> As this would be the only way to configure the daemon for various non-default modes, I agree with fixing the environmentfile path.

It's not the only way to configure the daemon.  It is a distro-specific legacy
method for configuring the daemon.  The modern cross-distro way to do this is
with systemd unit file overrides.

> It's probably fine to put PATENTS in licenses, but otherwise this is correct.

My thinking on this goes back to the reason we have a %license attribute
separate from %doc.  A system can be configured to skip installing
documentation files, but many licenses require the license text (or a subset of
it) always be distrusted with the software.  So a %license file is not
skippable, but a %doc file is.  I don't see any requirement in the upstream
PATENTS file to distribute that file with the software, so I think it makes
more sense as a %doc.  That said, the PATENTS file does say the literal word
"license", so perhaps it could go either way.  I've seen it done both ways in
other Fedora spec files.

> Please use "%{version}-%{release}" so that each build is easily identified.

I don't think that will work.  Upstream does special parsing of the version
strings for various properties of this output, so I believe including the
release field will cause similar errors to what are there now (or cause the
release field to be presented as something it isn't, like the commit hash).


-- 
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=2292255

Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202292255%23c7
--
_______________________________________________
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




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux