Bug 1301270

Summary:	Review Request: dma - a small Mail Transport Agent (MTA)
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	IWAI, Masaharu <iwaim.sub>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	alick9188, eclipseo, package-review
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2020-08-10 00:55:07 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	177841, 201449

Description IWAI, Masaharu 2016-01-23 11:12:24 UTC

Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/iwaim/fedora-pkgs/master/review/dma/dma.spec
SRPM URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/iwaim/fedora-pkgs/master/review/dma/dma-0.10-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: 
dma (DragonFly Mail Agent) is a small Mail Transport Agent (MTA), designed 
for home and office use.  It accepts mails from locally installed 
Mail User Agents (MUA) and delivers the mails either locally or to 
a remote destination.
Remote delivery includes several features like TLS/SSL support and
SMTP authentication.

dma is not intended as a replacement for real, big MTAs like sendmail(8)
or postfix(1).  Consequently, dma does not listen on port 25 for
incoming connections.
Fedora Account System Username:iwaim

Comment 1 Upstream Release Monitoring 2016-01-23 13:05:09 UTC

iwaim's scratch build of dma-0.10-1.fc23.src.rpm for dist-6E-epel completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12662912

Comment 2 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-02-07 22:13:14 UTC

 - Don't think this is valid. It's only used for alternate name or rename.

Provides: MTA

 - Not needed:

%{__rm} -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}

 - Not needed:

%defattr(-,root,root)

 - %{__make} %{?_smp_mflags} → %make_build

 - %{__make} install DESTDIR=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} → %make_install

 - Source0: https://github.com/corecode/dma/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz 

→

Source0: %url/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - %{__install} -m 644 → install -p -m 644

 - The license file mist be installed with %license' not %doc:

%license LICENSE
%doc README.* TODO

 - Version 0.11 was published, why aren't you using it?

 - Add gcc as a BR

 - Use %set_build_flags at the start of the build to use Fedora build flags:

%build
%set_build_flags

 - capitalize the summary

Comment 3 Package Review 2020-07-10 00:54:23 UTC

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

Comment 4 Package Review 2020-08-10 00:55:07 UTC

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.