Bug 200249 - Review Request: cvs2svn
Summary: Review Request: cvs2svn
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Paul F. Johnson
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-ACCEPT
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-07-26 14:49 UTC by Konstantin Ryabitsev
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-07-27 01:47:54 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
petersen: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Konstantin Ryabitsev 2006-07-26 14:49:13 UTC
Spec URL: http://blues.mcgill.ca/~icon/fe/cvs2svn.spec
SRPM URL: http://blues.mcgill.ca/~icon/fe/cvs2svn-1.4.0-0.1.rc1.src.rpm
Description:
cvs2svn is a Python script that converts a CVS repository to a 
Subversion repository. It is designed for one-time conversions, not for 
repeated synchronizations between CVS and Subversion.

NB: License says "BSD" because it's the same license and subversion, and the core subversion package says the license is "BSD" (even though it's a modified BSD).

Comment 1 Paul F. Johnson 2006-07-26 14:54:33 UTC
Okay...

Should this not be Development/Tools rather than Languages?

Could you also clarify if the licence for this software is modified BSD or
straight BSD please?

Comment 2 Konstantin Ryabitsev 2006-07-26 15:06:41 UTC
Hey, Paul:

You're right, I missed the Group bit -- will modify accordingly.

I guess I could change the license to "Modified BSD", even though the
modification is small:

 * 3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, if
 * any, must include the following acknowledgment: "This product includes
 * software developed by CollabNet (http://www.Collab.Net/)."
 * Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself, if
 * and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear.

It's somewhere between the original BSD and current BSD -- the dreaded
"advertise clause" is required, but only in documentation, so it's not a big
deal. Like I said, the subversion package in core lists the license as "BSD", so
I figure it's safe to leave it as just "BSD" for this one as well.

Full license text: http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/project_license.html

Comment 5 Paul F. Johnson 2006-07-26 21:19:25 UTC
Builds without a hitch. rpmlint is happy, mock is happy. The licence does seem
correct as BSD.

ACCEPTED



Comment 6 Konstantin Ryabitsev 2006-07-27 01:47:54 UTC
Wow, this is the fastest package review I've had in my life. :) Thanks, Paul!

Comment 7 Konstantin Ryabitsev 2007-04-03 16:15:40 UTC
Please create EPEL branches:
Branches: EL-4, EL-5

Comment 8 Jens Petersen 2007-04-06 06:48:34 UTC
done


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.