Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458685 --- Comment #20 from Pierre-YvesChibon <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-08-20 16:41:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #19) > As a matter of good programming style, it would be helpful to maintain a > CHANGELOG file, or to complete %changelog stanza entries outlining what was > done coming into a new tarball -- a version control system (something as simple > and lightweight as RCS, or something more formal) will do this for you. Isn't there one ? https://fedorahosted.org/r2spec/browser/R2spec-2.4.1/CHANGELOG for the spec: %doc README LICENSE CHANGELOG > As near as I can make out, there was a path issue (which you cured with a > swap), and an addition of a temporary file naming convention (which does NOT > check for a collision, and so is potentially unsafe -- I would add a check > there). Your are referring to when it writes the spec file ? Indeed it should check for the existence of the spec file before writing it, I'll patch that. If no, I am not sure to see what you are referring to. Thanks for the feed back -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review