[virt-tools-list] [virt-viewer] "Require spice-gtk 0.22" commit

[Marc-André Lureau]

----- Original Message -----
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:42:43PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > It seems the patch below was pushed without review. Even for trivial
> > > patches (not saying this one is), it would be nice to send them to the
> > > mailing list in case people want to review it after the fact.
> > >
> > > In this case, the patch has several issues:
> > > - typo in the commit log (which we can't fix now)
> > 
> > That's very usual, and really not a problem.
> > 
> > > - it does not update the .spec files nor the README file which refer to
> > >   0.20
> > 
> > Imho, README is the wrong place for version information. The spec
> > should also have version based on configure.ac
> > 
> > > - fixing autobuild.sh means more work on fedora side as f20 does not have
> > >   spice-gtk 0.22
> > 
> > ok, updating f20
> > 
> > >
> > > Can we get all pushed patches sent to the mailing list so that we can
> > > always
> > > have the option of getting code review goodness ? :)
> > 
> > Didn't we discuss this over and over again, and have a rule that says
> > that trivial fixes such as build-sys and doc don't have to go through
> > mandatory review? And that you can fix other related things the same
> > way without making a fuss?
> 
> Yes we allow trivial fixes, but increasing the min required version of
> a external dependancy does not qualify as a trivial fix IMHO, particularly

It was implicitly required before that commit.

> if that new version is not available in current stable Fedora releases.

I thought it was there already, now updating it.