https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187082



--- Comment #19 from Jonny Heggheim <jonnyheggh...@sigaint.org> ---
(In reply to Piotr Popieluch from comment #18)
> Looks good, approved.
Thanks!

> Thing to keep in mind is the non-numeric version number. This is only
> allowed when they increment properly otherwise it can cause update issues. I
> couldn't find upstreams versioning policy so not sure if it is.
I have a bad feeling that there are no versioning policy, the last commit was  
   Mar 8, 2011 and there are no tags/branches in the SVN repo at
code.google.com. There are no version info in aes.py (that is the only code in
the package). Debian also use 0.1a1 as the version number.

I am not sure where the version comes from, it might be the person who uploaded
to https://pypi.python.org/pypi/slowaes.

> I personally would include the license as a SOURCE, not patch it and I would
> use sed to remove the shebang. But this is ok.
I was thinking about the same, but I ended up with patches to make it more
declarative what is our changes.

-- 
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
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to