[Bug 520832] Review Request: quotatool - Disk utility for managing user quotas

[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=520832


Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)      |
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




--- Comment #18 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com>  2009-09-16 11:53:42 EDT ---
Review
=======
Good:

- rpmlint checks return nothing
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPLv2) OK, text in %doc
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
(9fbad0c03c21463c1529365764ab1e636b4a5c5aed95a7d3ed67b49cd39d7179)
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file 

Licensing Note: The source code does not contain any license attribution aside
from one reference:

   fprintf (stderr, "  Distributed under the GNU General Public License\n");

Technically, every source code file should have a comment header in which the
license of the code is given, something like:

/*
Copyright (C) yyyy  name of author

This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
as published by the Free Software Foundation; version 2
of the License.

This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
GNU General Public License for more details.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301, USA.
*/

You should ask upstream to add this header to all of their source files (with a
correct copyright date and author name).

Technically, the code without these attributions is under "GPL+", because the
GPL explicitly says that: "If the Program does not specify a version number of
this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software
Foundation."

However, we know from the website that the author's intent is for this code to
be GPLv2 only, so it is fine to leave it tagged as such. By adding the
copyright statement to his source files, he will also be specifying the version
of the GPL he intends to use, and closing this ambiguity.

*****
This package is approved, and I will sponsor you.

-- 
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.