Bug 426350

Summary:	Review Request: mono-basic
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Paul F. Johnson <paul>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	David Nielsen <gnomeuser>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	fedora-package-review, notting
Target Milestone:	---	Flags:	gnomeuser: fedora-review+ kevin: fedora-cvs+
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	mono-basic-1.2.6-4.fc9	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2008-02-01 07:32:22 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:

Description Paul F. Johnson 2007-12-20 12:01:14 UTC

Spec URL: http://pfj.fedorapeople.org/mono-basic.spec
SRPM URL: http://pfj.fedorapeople.org/mono-basic-1.2.6-1.fc9.src.rpm
Description: mono-basic is the visual basic compiler for mono

Comment 1 David Nielsen 2007-12-28 18:23:31 UTC

I'll take this as a bribe for fixing #394851. 

GOOD:
builds cleanly in mock (tested x86_64 Rawhide and i386 F8)
Owns all it's file and directories
the spec is in clean US English (and nifty sed magic)

BAD:
GPL/LGPL are no longer valid licenses
Summary needs to be capitalized (minor but rpmlint complains so let's shut it up)
mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 7)

Aside that, the spec seems to comply to packaging standards. Is there any reason to export the 
language variable?

Comment 2 Paul F. Johnson 2008-01-03 23:13:22 UTC

Fixed the bad bits and removed the export language bit (it was from another spec
file)

Comment 3 David Nielsen 2008-01-04 00:02:03 UTC

This seems sane to me.. APPROVED.

Comment 4 Jens Petersen 2008-01-07 04:59:40 UTC

Shouldn't the license be LGPLv2+?

Comment 5 Paul F. Johnson 2008-01-07 11:57:11 UTC

I'm not sure. 

This URL suggests GPLv2 : http://www.t2-project.org/packages/mono-basic.html, as
does
http://dsrg.mff.cuni.cz/projects/mono/diffs/showdiff.php?old=2005-11-05&new=2005-11-06&diffIndex=14&bench=.
However, I've seen it also listed as LGPL.

I'll see what upstream has to say.

Comment 6 Dennis Gilmore 2008-01-07 18:07:22 UTC

there is no CVS request here.  please follow the directions at 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure

Comment 7 Paul F. Johnson 2008-01-07 18:27:11 UTC

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: mono-basic
Short Description: VB.NET support for mono
Owners: pfj
Branches: FC7, FC8
InitialCC: pfj
Cvsextras Commits: yes

Comment 8 Kevin Fenzi 2008-01-08 03:11:33 UTC

cvs done.

Comment 9 David Nielsen 2008-02-01 07:32:22 UTC

This is in the repos now, CLOSING