https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2405065
--- Comment #9 from Michal Hlavinka <[email protected]> --- Thanks for pointing that out. I've missed that. Some context first: gpgme 2.0 was released, there is very limited api change that deprecated never working part of api was dropped. I've tried to rebuild all dependent packages in copr. Some packages failed to rebuild mostly because they used all switch case options (including the dropped one) to list all possible values so compiler/analyzer is quiet and does not complain. I've created PR with fixes for all affected packages and all are currently merged. Unfortunately, there are other packages that FTBFS for reasons unrelated to gpgme. So this package was created as temporary workaround for those. As there is no real API difference, there is no reason and no plan to keep this package. So, the question now is if the name must be changed or if its ok for temporary package? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2405065 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202405065%23c9 -- _______________________________________________ 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
