[Bug 492996] Review Request: mediawiki-Renameuser - An extension that provides a special page for renaming user accounts

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=492996


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-04-01 15:57:14 EDT ---
The URL in the spec doesn't seem related.

Can you indicate where you get a license of "Freely redistributable without
restriction"?  The only place I can see any indication of a license is in
SpecialRenameuser.php and it says GPLv2+.  The upstream web site says
"unspecified".  I think it's reasonable to assume that GPLv2+ applies to all
five php files since they're distributed together.  It would be nice to query
the author about inserting proper license notices as suggested by the GPL. 
Also note that in any case, "Freely distributable without restriction" is not
sufficiently free for code in Fedora.  We need the right to modify as well.

The README.fedora file mentions InputBox twice.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
  d791117c556ad9af35dc51dbac815ef129e507fcad30db9740bbaa3108bb4f59  
   RenameUserJob.php
  0f73d6727b396dfae1b3fd3126763e74fda852a70204a5d6b98815b3db6d9987  
   SpecialRenameuser.alias.php
  217a14bf162a32a2276b68f4e84ae820711943f259fa4ccb245e535f3aa9a3b1  
   SpecialRenameuser_body.php
  b952cb8b5dd7a636faae2ec15945db877a07ee26b3faf35932c2b59488a20b5a  
   SpecialRenameuser.i18n.php
  0220b4877670f5bc88a2b76e34ff677b44864a3424d4a4ec80ec82e7ef8aafcb  
   SpecialRenameuser.php

* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
X license field does not match the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* BuildRequires are proper (none, as there
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   mediawiki-Renameuser = 0-0.1.20090331svn.fc11
  =
   mediawiki >= 1.14

* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

The package review process needs reviewers!  If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.

-- 
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.