Bug 602064

Summary: Review Request: ledger - Command-line double-entry accounting system
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Ed Marshall <esm>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: rawhideCC: fedora-package-review, notting, randyn3lrx, shakthimaan
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-06-09 07:16:48 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 Ed Marshall 2010-06-09 04:44:52 UTC 
Spec URL: http://esm.logic.net/public/fedora/ledger/ledger.spec
SRPM URL: http://esm.logic.net/public/fedora/ledger/ledger-2.6.2-1.fc13.src.rpm
Description:
Ledger is a powerful, double-entry accounting system that is accessed from the UNIX command-line.

----

Please be kind, this is my first package submission to Fedora, and I'm in need of a sponsor.

Three additions besides what is in upstream have been added: a compilation fix for gcc 4.4 (added independently, but I later learned it was in the Ubuntu package), a man page (from Ubuntu), and a patch for the info page to make it UTF-8 (also from Ubuntu).

At this point, rpmlint seems happy with everything except for the executable bits on the scripts directory under /usr/share/doc/ledger-2.6.2/scripts; as they're actually working examples of how to write scripts for ledger reporting, it seemed appropriate that they retain execute permission, but I can remove it if that's a deal-breaker.

The only other complaint was the lack of documentation in the -devel and emacs packages; that seemed to be common enough in other packages I looked at, though.

Suggestions and criticism would be greatly appreciated, and I'll be happy to follow-up with revisions. Thanks!
Comment 1 Shakthi Kannan 2010-06-09 05:12:22 UTC 
This is a duplicate of? 

 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478613
Comment 2 Randy Berry 2010-06-09 07:16:48 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 478613 ***
Comment 3 Ed Marshall 2010-06-09 12:37:13 UTC 
Ack! You're absolutely right, I didn't see that my initial searching. :( Sorry for the noise.