https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2387518
--- Comment #16 from Fabio Valentini <[email protected]> --- Sorry for the radio silence here - getting a new package reviewed has been very low priority with updates for existing packages being more important. Thank you both for your comments, I'll be making some adjustments to address the feedback in the previous comments, and bump the package to the 1.0.0 final release. > %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/libfoundry{,-gtk}-1.pc should move to the devel > subpackage(s). Good catch, I added this to the wrong package. I moved it to the -devel package. > I think the GPL-3.0-or-later license is probably a mistake that we should be > able to remove. Created https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/foundry/-/issues/14 to > confirm. Let's wait for Christian to respond to this to make sure we get the > License tag right. Looks like this was resolved upstream between the 1.0.beta and the 1.0.0 release, I've adjusted the License tag accordingly. Thank you for filing the upstream ticket! > My recommendation is to removed the Provides: bundled(eggbitset) and > bundled(timsort). I know it's sometimes hard to decide where to draw the > line, but this seems too granular to me. It's a stretch to treat these little > copylibs as equivalent to bundled libraries just because they happen to have > their own meson.build and are two source files each instead of just one. You > wisely don't add Provides for all the other egg files because it wouldn't > scale well and the list would inevitably become stale. IMO having bundled "Provides" is *exactly* what you *should* do for copylibs. But to be fair, I really wasn't sure where / how to draw the line which ones to add, since it's a bit hard to tell where those even come from. "timsort" is just so ubiquitous that a web search didn't help at all. I'm fine with removing them if you think it makes more sense to draw the line of "what constitutes a bundled library" to the left of eggbitset and timsort :) > I've created https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/foundry/-/issues/15 to request a > man page and https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/foundry/-/merge_requests/8 to > placate the incorrect FSF address warning. Thank you! As for the package split - I will try to work on that, and will upload updated .spec and SRPM files when that's ready. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2387518 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202387518%23c16 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
