[Bug 452107] Review Request: cfdg - Context Free Design Grammar
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Oct 20 08:12:52 UTC 2008
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452107
Terje Røsten <terjeros at phys.ntnu.no> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #12 from Terje Røsten <terjeros at phys.ntnu.no> 2008-10-20 04:12:50 EDT ---
Review Guidelines MUST items:
- [OK] rpmlint output:
- [OK] package name
- [OK] %{name}.spec
- [OK] Packaging Guidelines
- [-] Licensing Guidelines
GPLv2+ is correct, however some files:
src-common/test* are under
Academic Free License version 2.0
Comment? Contact upstream.
- [OK] License Field in spec
- [-] License text in %doc
Seems like LICENSE.txt is missing the "and later"
which is present in files.
- [OK] Spec file in en_US
- [OK] legible spec file
- [OK] source matches upstream
md5sum ContextFreeSource2.1.tgz*
477242e74c4f953ceca7bf06e944a46e ContextFreeSource2.1.tgz
477242e74c4f953ceca7bf06e944a46e ContextFreeSource2.1.tgz.rpm
- [OK] compiles successfully
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=889881
- N/A %find_lang
- N/A shared libs
- N/A not relocatable
- [OK] directory ownership
- [OK] no duplicate files in %files
- [OK] proper permissions on files, %defattr present
- [OK] %clean section cleans %{buildroot}
- [OK] consistently uses macros
- [OK] package contains code
- N/A large docs
- [OK] %doc files do not affect runtime behaviour
- N/A header files in -devel
- N/A static libs in -static
- N/A foo.pc files
- N/A libfoo.so.1.1
- N/A no devel package
- N/A no .la archives
- N/A desktop file
- [OK] Does not own files/dirs owned by other packages
- [OK] %install cleans out %{buildroot} first
- [OK] all filenames are valid ASCII and thus UTF-8
- N/A Scriptlets
Summary:
everything seems fine except some licenses issues:
- a lot of files are missing license headers
- there are at least two licenses here GPLv2+ and
Academic Free License version 2.0
- LICENSE.txt seems to be GPLv2.
I would recommend to contact upstream about these issues.
Pedantic:
- remove extra space in version and release tag.
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list