[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Added RFN-violation bug template to wiki

On Fri, 2018-03-30 at 18:46 -0500, Nathan Willis wrote:

> On further reflection, though ... should this actually be split into
> two: "RFN violation" for fonts that need to be renamed due to the
> upstream RFN (when the build does not produce bit-identical binaries)
> plus "RFN missing" for packages where the RFN notice has disappeared?

I assume the RFN being missing is also a violation of the RFN clause?
If so then I think it should be enough to just have the one template
and usertag and make sure it covers both instances.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: