Bug 253020
| Summary: | Review Request: animorph - 3D Animation and Morph Library | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | mtasaka:
fedora-review+
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: | 2007-09-13 12:26:46 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: | 253022 | ||
|
Description
Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)
2007-08-16 17:18:20 UTC
Well, as this is rather a small package, there are
not so many items to be checked...
For 0.2-1:
* Redundant BuildRequires
- glibc-headers in minimal build environ
* License
- The following source files are under GPLv2+
-----------------------------------------------
./include/animorph/PoseSemiTarget.h
./include/animorph/PoseTarget.h
./src/PoseSemiTarget.cpp
./src/PoseTarget.cpp
------------------------------------------------
Change license tag to GPLv2+
(However, I guess the author intended to release
this under LGPLv2+. So after/before this package
is approved, would you contact with upstream?)
Actually the COPYING says LGPLv2+ e-mail send upstream about the license question... I hope an answear to have this state clearly... Any response from upstream? not any answear for now. I will send it again... What policy should we follow in this case (still no answear from upstream) Should we choose the more restrictive one The one which is written in the source code headers ? If animoph is GPL that implies that every app that link against it to be GPL also...So this change nothing about makehuman. I think that thoses libs was certainly taken out of makehumain to be buildable externally.. So they only changed the COPYING while doing make dist... (In reply to comment #5) > Should we choose the more restrictive one The one which is written in the > source code headers ? We must choose the "actual" license (i.e. we must judge the license from source code). In this case, the license is GPLv2+. Should I remove the COPYING as it conflict with what is said within the source code ? Does I need also to add thr right COPYING file ? The original COPYING file can be removed and I don't think we have to add the right license text. Spec URL: http://kwizart.free.fr/fedora/6/testing/makehuman/animorph.spec SRPM URL: http://kwizart.free.fr/fedora/6/testing/makehuman/animorph-0.2-2.kwizart.fc6.src.rpm Description: 3D Animation and Morph Library %changelog - Change license to GPLv2+ as said in the source code - Remove BR glibc-headers - Change summary (taken from animorph.pc) Okay!
-----------------------------------------------------
This pacakge (animorph) is APPROVED by me
-----------------------------------------------------
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: animorph Short Description: 3D Animation and Morph Library Owners: kwizart Branches: devel FC-6 F-7 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: <empty> Commits by cvsextras: yes cvs done. |