Bug 176528
| Summary: | Review Request: MochiKit: A lightweight JavaScript library | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-extras-list, j, maxamillion |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | kevin:
fedora-cvs+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2006-02-15 23:41:30 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: | 163779 | ||
|
Description
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2005-12-24 09:51:11 UTC
FYI, 1.2 is out. rpmlint says: W: MochiKit invalid-license MIT/Academic The code is indeed under both MIT and the Academic Free license ( http://www.opensource.org/licenses/afl-2.1.php ) and so meets the packaging guidelines but I don't know how to satisfy rpmlint. Are there selinux isues with pointing the web server into /usr/share? Perhaps /var/www would be a better location? (It kind of gives me indigestion to put such things under /var, but there is precedent in httpd-manual.) (In reply to comment #1) > Are there selinux isues with pointing the web server into /usr/share? Perhaps > /var/www would be a better location? (It kind of gives me indigestion to put > such things under /var, but there is precedent in httpd-manual.) Something I discovered (which gives *me* indigestion...) is that httpd has full read access to usr_t. Yes, that's right, Apache can read almost anything under /usr. I will update the package to 1.2 when I get a chance. Sorry for taking so long.... After seeing the Cacti package go in, I'll drop any objection I had to storing the files in /usr/share. And rpmlint only complains about the license, which is not an issue since the license is valid. So: No rpmlint blockers, just the end-of-line warning. Package meets naming and packaging guidelines. License is acceptable and matches License: tag. Specfile is properly named, legible, well-written, well-commented and uses macros consistently. Source file matches upstream. Package builds and installs on FC3 and FC4. I'd just like clarification on one thing. It's not common practise to install package tests under %doc (or even to install them at all). I understand that it's not really possible to execute those tests in any meaningful way at build time, but I wonder what your reasoning is behind including them in the final package. Examples are already included, so the tests don't really add much in the way of documentation. You're right, it doesn't make much sense. Updated. Cool. Approved. Built under FC4 and devel. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: MochiKit New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: maxamillion cvs done. |