[Bug 403801] Review Request: jpoker - A jQuery user interface to play on poker-network based servers

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: jpoker - A jQuery user interface to play on poker-network based servers


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=403801


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-12-03 19:37 EST -------
There's not really all that much to this.  In fact, I'm not really clear on what
it's supposed to do; I guess the expectation is that you're running the web
server on the same machines as the poker-network server, because this offers no
choice of server or even any way to configure the server it connects to
(proxy.php seems to hardcode http://127.0.0.1:19382).

Is it safe to have this enabled and exposed to the world by default?

The upstream web site indicates this is some sort of jquery plugin, but the
package bundles jquery itself.  I guess it would be super-pointless to cook up
some method for sharing an 80K javascript library between packages, but I don't
relish the thought of a security issue cropping up in a little library that's
embedded in a bunch of places.  I guess you could do it with symlinks.

I'm a bit confused about the License: tag.  I see parts which are GPLv2+:
  proxy.php
  tables.html
  index.html
  jquery.jpoker.js
  tournaments.html
and parts which are dual-licensed MIT and an unknown GPL version:
  jquery.js
  jquery-tablesorter.js
but I don't see what's licensed as BSD.

So to me it looks more like "License: GPLv2+ and (MIT or GPL+)" is closer to the
truth, but maybe I'm missing something.  It's funny how COPYING and
GPL-LICENSE.txt both contain the GPL, but one is re-intended and is missing a
single comma at the end of the copyright line and the entire "How to Apply" section.

The only thing that really troubles me is the License: tag, which should be
trivial to double-check and fix if necessary before you check in.

Review:
* source files match upstream:
   e587b27fbb0b7ac6569d5850375513d661e5bd759671d14137ec91ccc8bdec38  
   jpoker-1.0.6.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
? license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none)
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   jpoker = 1.0.6-1.fc9
  =
   httpd
   php
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  Seems to work as far as I can 
   figure it out.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

APPROVED; please just double check License: before you check in.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.