Bug 466147
| Summary: | Review Request:fedora-ksplice - Script Collection for Using KSplice on Fedora Linux | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jochen Schmitt <jochen> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Stefan Posdzich <cheekyboinc> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | cheekyboinc, fedora-package-review, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | cheekyboinc:
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: | 2009-03-08 19:56:09 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
Jochen Schmitt
2008-10-08 17:42:33 UTC
New upstream release: Spec URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice.spec SRPM URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice-0.2-1.fc9.src.rpm New upstream release: Spec URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice.spec SRPM URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice-0.3-1.fc9.src.rpm The two included scripts, which seem to be the meat of the package, are clearly under GPLv2, yet COPYING is GPLv3. This seems a bit confused. Legally we're supposed to take the versioning from the licenses on the actual code, so GPLv2 is correct here. Thank you for you comment. The COPYING file was created by the autotools, but I have noew corrected it on svn://fedorahosted.org/fedora-ksplice/trunk Because I have create some new enhancement/bugfixes, I will create a new release next week. New upstream release: Spec URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice.spec SRPM URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice-0.4-1.fc9.src.rpm New upstream release: Spec URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice.spec SRPM URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm New upstream release: Spec URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice.spec SRPM URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/fedora-ksplice/fedora-ksplice-0.5-2.fc10.src.rpm ++ REVIEW ++ MUST: rpmlint output | GOOD rpmlint fedora-ksplice-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint fedora-ksplice-0.5-1.fc10.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. MUST: package must be named according to Package Naming Guidelines | GOOD MUST: The spec file name must match the base package | GOOD MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines | GOOD MUST: licensed with a Fedora approved license | GOOD License: GPLv3 MUST: License field must match the actual license | GOOD MUST: Docs (with license) | GOOD AUTHORS COPYING README MUST: The spec file must be written in American English | GOOD MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible | GOOD MUST: md5sum | GOOD src.rpm: 8b6a7bbc5a1d14bd53b62fd405056fc2 fedora-ksplice-0.5.tar.gz upstream: 8b6a7bbc5a1d14bd53b62fd405056fc2 fedora-ksplice-0.5.tar.gz MUST: compile and build on at least one primary architecture. | GOOD http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1136624 MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires | GOOD MUST: not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing | GOOD MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly | GOOD MUST: Package is working | GOOD APPROVED New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: fedora-ksplice Short Description: Script Collection for Using KSplice on Fedora Linux Owners: s4504kr Branches: F-9 F-10 The upstream README says GPLv3 or later... shouldn't the tag in the spec be 'GPLv3+'? cvs done. |