Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702987 Martin Gieseking <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[email protected] |[email protected] --- Comment #10 from Martin Gieseking <[email protected]> 2011-07-31 03:35:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > Does it sound reasonable? Yes, absolutely. From the Fedora point of view, it's clear that the package is licensed under LGPLv2+ and no further action is required. However, it's good practice to add the license header to every source file as denoted in the GPL license text. If a potential third-party project takes some code files from stdair, it's always clear how the single files are licensed and who's the copyright owner even if the developer of the third-party program forgets to add a notice about stdair to his README. Here are some more notes: - The latest package doesn't build because of missing BR: python-devel http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3240849 There are possibly some more dependencies missing. Try to build the package with mock/koji to find all deps. - As far as I can see, you can drop Requires: cmake since %{_datadir}/cmake/ is not used (unlike mentioned in the comment). - Please prefer plain shell commands (rm, install, chmod, etc. ) over macros http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Macros - Move the find command and the following "mydocs lines" from the %check to the %install section. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
