rather
impressive, see
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=827061
and I'd expect something similar in other distributions too. Mostly
this is head-ache of upstreams but it might be good manners to file
upstream error tickets early :)
--
Antti Järvinen
--
devel mailing list
Michael Schwendt writes:
Over the last years I've talked to quite some people. Some simply find
the package review process too embarrassing, because the tickets are
world-readable. Once they learn that the package they offer is full of
mistakes, they consider it public shaming and would
in release in Oct?
--
Antti Järvinen, proud reporter of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1202063
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Kevin Kofler writes:
For applications that support both? In the absence of other criteria (e.g.
features that are not yet ported, or conversely, features that require Qt
5), the rule of thumb is to build against Qt 5 on Fedora 22 and newer, and
against Qt 4 on Fedora 21 and older.
is 6AC2D159AB3A0B0F241DD6D12E4A1673588DD0E8.
--
Antti Järvinen, Oulu, Finland
-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Version: GnuPG v1
mQGiBDi9E/8RBACkxa+Ri4/HApuv5XmnATpnvDBu8qlAtOn55x4iiZ2xpb+EF/lG
nQpv7qSffemUwe8bb8t7Ob8DbIXjdTqHfbUvjoYesZTSYf7qAaVVSnPJxaWHxxMC
waVfQfE1FTsEjk1dS5m5nwwSmfQC12jeA0nDXDdfK2l3QJlEL7xXQgLhdwCglr6d
