[Bug 225652] Merge Review: comps-extras

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Merge Review: comps-extras

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225652

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]            |[e-mail]
               Flag|fedora-review-              |fedora-review?

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2007-02-07 13:33 EST -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > > W: comps-extras no-url-tag
> >
> > Yep, there's not one.
>
> Use http://www.fedoraproject.org/ then.

It's used by more than Fedora, though, so that's not appropriate either.  And no
cvsweb (since that would be a good answer)
> > There isn't an upstream tarball location.  The upstream _are_ the packages
> > that are built.
>
> If there's a source control system with public anonymous access, please point to
> that. Checking the included tarball against the upstream tarballs are a MUST
> item in the review list. (BLOCKER)

Added a comment pointing to the upstream CVS.  There aren't tarballs, so that's
the best there can be.
> > > GPL may not be a very appropriate license for a set of PNG images
> >
> > It's not normal, but it's fine.
>
> Then please include a copy of the GPL license in the source tarball (and , and
> add a note somewhere in the tarball or the comment field of the image files
> themselves that the files are licensed under the GPL. Presently, the only
> mention of the license is the spec file, which means that one cannot confirm
> that it is used correctly.
> If there is no mention of free software license somewhere, one should assume
> that it's proprietary, at least according to the US law. (BLOCKER)

There is a mention somewhere -- the spec file is in the upstream source and says
GPL.  I've dropped COPYING into the CVS repo for the next time there's a pull done.
> > Given that there's nothing actually done, this doesn't actually make a
> > difference
>
> Agreed. But then please remove the line "make" from the %build section. The
> section is allowed to be empty.

I don't care enough to keep arguing why this doesn't matter ;)  Removed.