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=455067
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841 |
--- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-08-25 03:42:56 EDT --- For 2.0.2-2:
(In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #4)
- License
- As far as I verified the source code, the license tag should be "GPLv2+".
Official site ( http://ferm.foo-projects.org/) says: "Licensed under the GPLv2"
- Well I assume the site you quoted is using wrong license tag, because - We guess under what license the package is released by checking the whole codes in the tarball - Some files in the tarball declares explicitly the license is under GPLv2+ (see files under doc/). (I guess the upstream are using "GPLv2" on the site with the meaning of "GPL version 2 and any later" :) )
However as "GPLv2" is more strict than "GPLv2+", for now I accept "GPLv2" license tag. However please ask the upsteam which is correct.
- Macros usage consistency
- When using { on macros, please use { for all macros (except for some cases) consistently. You use %{_mandir} and %_sbindir , for example.
%_sbindir replaced by %{_sbindir} Is there any guidelines about it or is it only by the aesthetic considerations?
- Only cosmetic issue
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
- "system/firewalls" is not a standard Group (please refer to $ rpmlint -I non-standard-group
Thanks. I'm change it to "Applications/System". But another question is why rpmlint was silent??
- On my system rpmlint warned about this.s
You are using stable version of the rpmlint or rawhide? May be I can tune warning level somewhere?
$ rpm -q rpmlint rpmlint-0.84-2.fc9.noarch
- rpmlint-0.84-2.fc10.noarch. Maybe the dependent packages are related.
Now: - This package itself is okay - Your other review requests seem good to some extent. (There are some apparent issues which need fixing, however I don't guess I can have a time to review other review requests of yours as I am already reviewing 20 requests... I hope someone else will review other requests of yours.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This package (ferm) is APPROVED by mtasaka -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please follow the procedure written on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join from "Install the Client Tools (Koji)". As I found your name in FAS I am sponsoring you now.
If you want to import this package into Fedora 8/9, you also have to look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT (after once you rebuilt this package on koji Fedora rebuilding system).
If you have questions, please ask me.