[Bug 427512] Review Request: hunspell-ta - Tamil hunspell dictionaries

[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: hunspell-ta - Tamil hunspell dictionaries


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427512


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-01-06 21:59 EST -------
I don't see any mention of the GPL version in use; how did you determine that
the file is under GPLv2+?  It seems that without any explicit mention, GPL+ is
appropriate.

Otherwise this package is fine.  The issue is pretty minor; I'll go ahead and
approve this package and you can double check the GPL version when you check in.

* source files match upstream:
   c3ff9fe4f17dc204c983ee62add444342be5d6b1ff306ab2c6e47711b707b3b8  
   ta-demo.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:
   hunspell-ta = 20060222-2.fc9
  =
   hunspell
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* acceptable content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

APPROVED

-- 
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.