[Bug 817306] Review Request: libircclient - C library to create IRC clients

[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=817306

Thomas Spura <tomspur at fedoraproject.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tomspur at fedoraproject.org
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura <tomspur at fedoraproject.org> 2012-04-29 11:10:08 EDT ---
- # Prefer static build because it only generates an unversioned .so
  %configure --disable-shared --enable-openssl --enable-ipv6

Why not building a versioned .so then?

That would make it way easier to update this package, without updating
metaglest each time...

When you have a static library, this MUST go into a -static subpackage. So the
-devel must provide it in this case, but I highly prefer building a versioned
.so and ask upstream to do so too...

In both cases the devel package needs to require the main package (if
existent), e.g. in your libminiupnpc package.

- License is wrong:
src/ and include/ is LGPLv3+
in cocoa/ are BSD/MIT/LGBLv2+ which are all GPL compat according to:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main
but unused in the build.

To be on the save side, it'd be best to "rm -rvf cocoa" them in %prep...

-->> License is LGPLv3+

- Are the patches send upstream?
  Please make a note on that in the spec file

- Development/C is a non-standard-group, I'd use Development/Libraries here
too.

-- 
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.