On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 08:39 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > End of August I've opened tickets about duplicate and potentially > conflicting (because if noarch <-> arch differences) %doc files. > The response from packagers has not been brilliant so far. > > These are _package bugs_ specific to Fedora, so it's the responsibility > of a Fedora Packager to fix them. It's a mistake in the spec file, not > in the packaged software. > > "Potentially conflicting" may mean that several subpackages could not > be installed at once and would cause a transaction error. > > Rather than spamming bugzilla with lots of NEEDINFO calls, hereby I'd > like to raise awareness of the issue. I don't understand why packagers > don't respond in bugzilla. Fedora 20 is near.
If you mentioned a list of bugs or at least a shared string from the descriptions of all of them, maybe provenpackagers could take some time to help out. (Well, I guess we could go digging in your bugzilla history, but it seems like more trouble than is necessary.) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
