https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2025398
--- Comment #4 from Link Dupont <link(a)sub-pop.net> ---
Hey, I'm not gone... just busy. I looked at the current GitHub repository, and
noticed there are no tags at all. That's probably why I set up the version as
"0" and used a specific git commit. I believe this is the procedure recommended
in the packaging guidelines when upstream has not published a tagged version or
tarball. With version 2.1 not existing as a tag or tarball, I'd rather version
it as "0" for now. If upstream decides to apply a reproducible tag, we can use
that instead. I'll open the patches as pull requests to the project. That's a
good point.
I haven't pushed this review request forward since I'm not sure if it qualifies
for inclusion in Fedora. I think it requires a ROM file in order to run. Isn't
that against the packaging guidelines?
--
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=2025398
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...