[Bug 500013] Review Request: dansguardian - Content filtering web proxy

[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=500013


Matej Cepl <mcepl at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |needinfo?(felix at fetzig.org)




--- Comment #3 from Matej Cepl <mcepl at redhat.com>  2009-05-29 11:16:22 EDT ---
+ GOOD: rpmlint is silent on both source and binary package.
+ GOOD: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
+ GOOD: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
  %{name}.spec.
+ GOOD: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines .
? UNEASY: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
I would feel much better if you mentioned somehwere (specfile, copyright
statements in the source code) explicit permission to package it in Fedora from
http://dansguardian.org/?page=copyright2:

* freely (no cost) downloadable from this site for general purpose unix
distributions like FreeBSD, Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc 

Otherwise we could look like changing software's license without author's
permission.

+ GOOD: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.

see the previous point, it is correct as of now; it would have to be changed,
if license files are not changed, or changed in different way.

- BAD: LICENSE file is in %doc.

It isn't ... COPYING file that is.

+ GOOD: The spec file is written in American English.
+ GOOD: The spec file for the package is legible.
+ GOOD: The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
68c8e9a97a3b58d2467a19cb15db5599
+ GOOD: The package successfully compiles and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
  Koji scratch build is
  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1383216
+ GOOD: builds on all architectures
+ GOOD: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. (builds in koji)
+ GOOD: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
  No locale support.
+ GOOD: no libraries
+ GOOD: not relocatable
+ GOOD: A package owns all directories that it creates.
+ GOOD: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
+ GOOD: Permissions on files must be set properly.
+ GOOD: Each package have a %clean section.
+ GOOD: Each package consistently use macros.
+ GOOD: The package contains code, or permissable content.
+ GOOD: No large documentation files, so no a -doc subpackage.
+ GOOD: Files registered in %doc does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+ GOOD: No header files.
+ GOOD: No static libraries.
+ GOOD: No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
+ GOOD: The package does not contain library files with a suffix.
+ GOOD: No devel packages.
+ GOOD: No .la libtool archives.
+ GOOD: Packages does not contain GUI applications.
+ GOOD: Packages does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
+ GOOD: Runs rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install
+ GOOD: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
+ GOOD: Includes license text.

Please fix or explain above show issues.

-- 
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.