[Bug 617764] Review Request: gphotoframe - Photo Frame Gadget for the GNOME Desktop

[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=617764

--- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> 2010-07-24 03:46:19 EDT ---
Thank you for initial comments.

(In reply to comment #2)
> [XX] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
> the review.
> 
> I'm guessing that the dangerous-commands are fine since they're macros and
> presumably fine. Perms are my thing. Seems to be an rpath sneaking around in
> gpf-ss. spectool -g gets the tarball, so that's fine as well.
> 
> So, just that rpath issue.

- Well, what do you mean "rpath" here? This is noarch and rpath
  should not be related.

> [OK] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
> format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
> [XX] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
> license.
> 
> Looking at COPYING, it seems there is GPLv2+, MIT, and BSD code included as
> well. Nothing bad, just might need to be listed.

- Will change the license tag to "GPLv3+ and GPLv2+" (and adding some
  comments that some png files are under GPLv2+. I usually don't
  explicit write about MIT or BSD or so if GPL codes are also included).

> Other:
> 
> - For the EPEL stuff at the top, the sitearch macro can be removed since this
> is noarch.

- Will remove %python_sitearch

> - How is python3 parallel install? 

- I guess the upstream will say something when python3 is supported.
  And I have not tried python3... so for now I want to make this package
  just support python2.

-- 
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.