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=438587 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-11-02 07:04:44 EDT --- "Here you can find "sqlite3x" and "sq3", two different C++ wrapper APIs for working with sqlite3 databases. These two independent APIs are different in nature but are distributed together because they are maintained together." We should probably put them into separate binary subpackages. I agree with ditching pointless stupid build systems when they're too complex to get them to work. But normally I use that as a reason for ditching autocrap and just writing proper Makefiles. I would advocate that in this case, rather than replacing one crap overengineered build system with another. But not a review blocker. Would be good to have a licence file, but not mandatory since upstream doesn't have it. Approved -- but please consider splitting into separate packages for sqlite3x vs. sq3 before doing the first build. -- 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