Greetings
On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 6:51 AM W. Michael Petullo via golang
wrote:
>
>
> Should the license field in the .spec file contain the license for hugo's
> source code or should it contain the union of all of the licenses found
> across all of the imported packages? The non-vendor-versioned
> In this case, I think you should point to the LICENSE file at the top level
> of the project ->
> https://github.com/gohugoio/testmodBuilder/blob/master/LICENSE
This file is not in the version of the repository pulled by go2rpm.
However, I figured out that I can place it in the root of the packa
On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 12:51 AM W. Michael Petullo via golang <
golang@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > FYI, members of Go-SIG plan to propose vendoring dependencies as the
> > default method to package Golang packages.
> >
> > This is the draft of the document:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/w
> FYI, members of Go-SIG plan to propose vendoring dependencies as the
> default method to package Golang packages.
>
> This is the draft of the document:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GolangPackagesVendoredByDefault
I would like to experiment with go2rpm's vendor profile. I am trying
Hi Mike,
FYI, members of Go-SIG plan to propose vendoring dependencies as the
default method to package Golang packages.
This is the draft of the document:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GolangPackagesVendoredByDefault
Being Hugo a complex package it's safe to start using go-vendor-tools
I have some review requests for Go packages that are required for Hugo
0.147.3:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2366312
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2366320
I have COPR builds of all of this, including the new Hugo package and
an update to the existing golang-github-bep
>> I have some review requests for Go packages that are required for Hugo
>> 0.140.1:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2334845
> Needs some changes.
Revision published to original bug report.
Thank you for the quick work! The Hugo 0.140.2 package is ready, pending
me completing th
Hi Mike,
Hau idatzi du W. Michael Petullo via golang
(golang@lists.fedoraproject.org) erabiltzaileak (2024 abe. 29(a), ig.
(21:17)):
>
> I have some review requests for Go packages that are required for Hugo
> 0.140.1:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2334845
Needs some changes.
>
I have some review requests for Go packages that are required for Hugo
0.140.1:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2334845
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2334847
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2334848
Additionally, I have a merge request pending for the gitmap p
Hi Mike,
Reviewed and approved both packages.
Regards,
Mikel
Hau idatzi du W. Michael Petullo (m...@flyn.org) erabiltzaileak (2024
mar. 17(a), ig. (03:23)):
>
> I have some review requests for Go packages that are required for Hugo
> 0.124.0:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=22698
I have some review requests for Go packages that are required for Hugo
0.124.0:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269893
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269901
Once these are approved, I will update our Hugo package to 0.124.0.
I am working through updating the existing pa
11 matches
Mail list logo
