[Bug 453850] Review Request: globus-openssl - Openssl Library (virtual GPT glue package)

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453850





--- Comment #7 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <oget.fedora at gmail.com>  2009-04-07 20:53:52 EDT ---
OK, here are my comments, notes, questions etc.

- rpmlints
   globus-openssl.x86_64: E: no-binary
   globus-openssl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
   globus-openssl-progs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
can be ignored.

? Where does the version number come from? and why is the release number 0.x?

* The license seems to be just ASL 2.0. Is there any non-trivial differences?
If not, please use ASL 2.0:
   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses

! No need to BR: pkgconfig on the main package. It will be picked up by
openssl-devel.

! No need to Requires: openssl on the progs subpackage since it already
requires the main package which requires openssl.

! No need to Requires: zlib-devel and pkgconfig on the devel subpackage since
openssl-devel will pull them up.

* The new guidelines suggest that %global should be preferred over %define

! Could you collect all your "%global"s at one place?

! Please make the descriptions span 80 columns

? Why are you packaging the .filelist files?

? Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 
   /usr/share/globus and /usr/share/globus/packages is already owned by
globus-core. Shouldn't you just put globus-core as a requirement to this
package? Is this package useful without globus-core?

-- 
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.