https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725292
Julio Gonzalez Gil <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] Flags| |needinfo?([email protected]) --- Comment #31 from Julio Gonzalez Gil <[email protected]> --- I can take care of this if Jorge is not willing to continue. We could say that I continued Jorge's work somehow at https://github.com/juliogonzalez/s3fs-fuse-rpm, so I guess preparing my current SPEC for Fedora should not be that hard after some cleaning up, and adapting to the Fedora policies (and learning how to submit, since I am a SUSE guy and I am not yet familiar with how things work at Fedora :-) @A(In reply to Andrew Gaul from comment #29) > I contribute to s3fs; is there anything I could do to move this along? s3fs > has been releasing versions for the past few years and now Ubuntu packages > it as "s3fs". As far as I can see https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fuse-s3fs/blob/master/f/fuse-s3fs.spec does not provide s3fs, so there should not be a conflict if we pick up this name. But to have all the alternatives covered before I contact Norman: Andrew, would be fine using the naming s3fs-fuse for the package if s3fs is still being used somehow? -- 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 -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/CN5ZCIWQICG7T2WTJJ4TDQX3FQUKPYRN/
