Bug 456178
| Summary: | Review Request: pyabiword - Python bindings for libabiword | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Marc Maurer <uwog> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Robin Norwood <robin.norwood> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, kevin, mpg, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | robin.norwood:
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: | 2008-07-31 20:14:31 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
Marc Maurer
2008-07-21 22:46:42 UTC
$ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/pyabiword-0.6.1-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/rnorwood/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/pyabiword-0.6.1-1.fc9.i386.rpm pyabiword.i386: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. o AUTHORS and COPYING are good candidates for marking as %doc. (COPYING must be included). Also, the contents of the examples/ directory could be included. o The source files don't include a license, which they should. The contents of the COPYING file (GPLv2) isn't enough to indicate the license. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ o The 'Vendor' tag should not be used according to Fedora packaging guidelines. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines Everything else looks ok to me. Once the above issues are fixed, I can approve. Oops, I shouldn't have set the review flag to '-' while awaiting these fixes. Spec URL: http://uwog.net/~uwog/pyabiword.spec SRPM URL: http://uwog.net/~uwog/pyabiword-0.6.1-2.fc9.src.rpm Changes: - Added documentation, including examples - Removed old Vendor tag Re licensing: I think the implied version is GPLv2+, as pyabiword links with libabiword. I'd prefer to update the spec when I get explicit approval from all contributors though. Sorry, I neglected to check for missing BuildRequires - These needed to be added for the package to build in koji: BuildRequires: gtk2-devel BuildRequires: libglade2-devel BuildRequires: libgnomeprintui22-devel BuildRequires: goffice04-devel BuildRequires: enchant-devel BuildRequires: fribidi-devel BuildRequires: wv-devel Assuming license issues and BR's are added, this gets a pass from me. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: pyabiword Short Description: Python bindings for libabiword Owners: uwog Branches: F-9 devel OLPC-3 InitialCC: uwog Cvsextras Commits: yes Can we please sort out the license before importing/building? We don't want to distribute something we are unsure of the license of... I am _sure_ it is GPL1+ now, because that is actually how the license works: if no explicit version is given, and that copyright file is included, then it is GPLv1+. That's just how it works. I asked some of the pyabiword devs, and they agree with that. Now, that does not mean that I can't make the next release v2+ (which I will do, but 'relicencing' always takes time), but _this_ release is GPLv1+. Ah indeed... sorry for the confusion on my part here, I was thinking there was no indication what the license was at all. :( cvs done. Marc, I think you can close this now. Thanks. Yep, thx. |