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=524605 --- Comment #12 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-17 09:23:28 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > Please update the License-Filed in specfile accordingly to what you wrote > before > to GPLv3+ and contact upstream regarding the license issue in the *.svg-files. I have contacted the author of the program but got no reply so far. I think the licensing of the icons is different than the one from the program, because they were done by two different authors, who AFAIK published them as GPLv2+. So we could use GPLv3+ in the spec, but I'll wait for further clarification from upstream first. > There also is no licensing hint in the sourcefile (gtrayicon.c) itself, so you > may want to suggest upstream to fix that. Will do. > A desktop-file seems to be missing. This obviously is a GUI application, how is > it intended to be started without an item in a menu? If necessary, please add > the desktop-file. A desktop file is useless because the command to run gtraycon needs to be customized. Just calling grayicon doesn't work, you need to specify the commands for 'activate' and 'deactivate' and optionally a custom menu file. The resulting commandline should be added in the session-properties to autostart the trayicon, so there really is no need for a desktop file. > As Martin already said, since RPM applies compression for the manpage itself, > you also should consider to apply his suggestion to modify the %build and > %install section. Agreed. I will remove the compression statement and the suffix on the file. Nevertheless I think that Martin should bring up the suffix topic on fedora-packaging because it really makes sense what he said. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review