Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: concordance - Software to program the Logitech Harmony remote control https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=328161 ------- Additional Comments From dev@xxxxxxxxxx 2008-04-21 21:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #31) > (In reply to comment #29) > > Hi, I did some work on the concordance package (I somehow missed the > review), so you might want to > > take a look at http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/concordance.spec), I havn't done > any of the udev/hal stuff, > > but I managed to get the libraries & bindings building from the one source > package. > > I plan on adding the bindings to the libconcord package in the near future, > but I'm sure how it was viewed to have different package base names in the > same spec file. Right now I have a review in progress for libconcord as a > separate package. I queried this myself, one base package seems to fit the need, unless of course upstream are going to split it into three. However.... there is currently nothing in the Naming Guidelines that say either way. Personally I'm not fussed either way, but I prefer a single src.rpm at the moment. Personally, I'd recommend to them, that the distribute the components (concordance, libconcord, bindings etc) as separate packages but thats just my view. > > > Also, by my reckoning, the License is GPLv3 (Not GPLv3+) I can't see an or > later clause... > > You need to look at the source files; they all have the "or later" clause. Yeah, my bad. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review