Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817315 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Spura <[email protected]> 2012-05-03 03:50:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > I updated the package, changelog, as well as bump release :-) to match the > changes after reviews for libircclient and miniupnpc. Great :) > The only question I have about bumping release, is that would not it be > better to have a pattern of starting with 0.1 ... 0.9x and then bump to > 1 when package is considered ok? No. 0.1 ... and up is for prereleases, e.g. when you package megaglest-3.6.1 (which might be available in the upstream repository, but is not released yet). More here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning > megaglest-data.spec not modified. I guess, you need another review request for megaglest-data, as that's a differenc spec/package. But better revisit that, when the current dependencies are in. (As upstream releases both in separate packages, it might be best to do it that way too...) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
