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: qsa: Qt Script for Applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191589 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-11 11:37 EST ------- Thaks, I'll try to roll up a 1.1.4 package in the next few days. As for the naming convention, it seems stat if qt 4.1.x will make its way into fc5, it will be called qt4, while qt 3.3.x will be called just qt. So why not to rename your package to qsa4 (or qsa-qt4), while mine will be called just qsa (or qsa-qt3)? Wouldn't it be more consistent? I don't mean to be intrusive. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedoraemail@example.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review