Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 ------- Additional Comments From paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-01-03 06:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #22) > What's the status on this review? The thing that was holding it up originally was the license. This has been fixed by a new upstream release (0.67) which states that it's licensed under the same terms as perl itself (i.e. GPL or Artistic). In Comment #21, Robin was going to check whether Bug #73921 and Bug #129724 were still present before going ahead with owning the package in Extras, I have created an updated SRPM for 0.67 that brings the package much more into line with the way perl modules are normally written for Extras. This addresses the directory ownership issue of Bug #73921. I haven't checked the status of Bug #129724 but that looks to me more like an issue for upstream rather than a packaging issue, and I don't think that should block the package from being imported. Updated SRPM: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-RPM2/perl-RPM2-0.67-1.src.rpm Updated Spec: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-RPM2/perl-RPM2.spec Robin, what's the state of play for this package from your point of view? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
