Description: A compact XMPP desktop messenger. spec: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/squawk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08113474-squawk/squawk.spec srpm: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/squawk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08113474-squawk/squawk-0.2.3-1.fc42.src.rpm fas: fed500 Reproducible: Always
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8113532 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2316944-squawk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08113532-squawk/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
So, two comments/questions before I 'fail' a couple of sections. First, SimpleCrypt, is only being used for the 'jammer' password option. Simply removing that option solves a bunch of the BSD/something license issues, right? S why not just remove it as an option, plain text, user entered, or kwallet gives the gammut of 'don't care', 'don't trust' and 'reasonable option'. Then there isn't the whole "how legitimate is it to update the license" "why doesn't the license file call out BSD" "Without the update the license isn't valid for fedora" issues. Secondly, the .so plugins dependencies aren't being picked up by the automatic library dependency logic and that results in missing dependencies. I think those should be manually requires/recommended because it possible some of them won't be installed (ex:kf5-kwallet). Other than that, at the moment it looks reasonable when checked against the lmdbal library. I can/will post the full review template if you don't see this/fix it in the next day or so.
Just to clarify, even if we agree that reverting/updating the license file so its a BSD-3-Clause as originally intended is a legal/legitimate change, that then causes a problem because the binary using it is in violation of the license because its not carrying the required copyright. IMHO its better to just remove the BSD-3-Clause code from the binary/project. KISS, and it removes a completely bogus password save option too.
Upstream is updating. Will create a new srpm once that is done.