https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825557
Kalev Lember <kalevlember(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |kalevlember(a)gmail.com
Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |kalevlember(a)gmail.com
--- Comment #12 from Kalev Lember <kalevlember(a)gmail.com> ---
Hi Greg,
Like we talked on IRC, I'm now a sponsor and going to help you become an
official packager.
The spec file here looks very nice, but I have a question about the package
naming, which is currently:
upstream tarball: clucene-core
source package: mingw-clucene
binary packages: mingw32-clucene-core / mingw64-clucene-core
Some of the things are called "clucene", and some "clucene-core".
Wouldn't it
make sense to stick with one name everywhere? I think it's a bit confusing to
have different names for the source and binary packages; in the mingw packaging
we've so far tried to keep them the same to keep the packaging simple and avoid
confusion.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.