Bug 757851 (ark)
Summary: | Review Request: ark - Archive manager | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Rex Dieter <rdieter> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Radek Novacek <rnovacek> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | kevin, notting, ovasik, package-review, rnovacek |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | rnovacek:
fedora-review+
gwync: 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: | 2011-12-15 19:58:43 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: | 656997, 765955 |
Description
Rex Dieter
2011-11-28 20:34:40 UTC
*** Bug 757850 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Name: ok License: not ok, batchextract.(h|cpp) have BSD license and are compiled to ark binary in main package, so licence should be BSD and GPLv2+ (same as for -libs subpackage) Source: ok BRs/Reqs: ok Macros used consistently: ok ldconfig: ok Desktop file validations: ok Locales: ok Docs: COPYING should be installed Devel: NA Files: ok Build: ok rpmlint: no need to fix ark.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gzip -> zip, grip, g zip ark.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rar -> arr, ear, tar ark.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lha -> la, ha, lea ark.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/applications/kde4/ark.desktop ark-libs.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided kdeutils-ark-libs ark-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings. Please, fix the license and docs and this package will be good to go. I think I disagree with your point about licensing. Taking BSD + GPLv2+ sources does indeed result in an aggregate binary license that is GPLv2+ (the license: tag in .spec files is intended to track the licensing of packaged binaries, not necessarily track every licence of the sources used). OK, thanks for explanation, I'm setting fedora-review+. I don't consider missing COPYING as blocker. Thanks, I'll make sure to add %doc COPYING before issuing any builds New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: ark Short Description: Archive manager Owners: than jreznik ltinkl rnovacek rdieter kkofler Branches: f16 Git done (by process-git-requests). imported |