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=533721 --- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-11-09 07:44:34 EDT --- perl-Net-CIDR review: rpmlint output: perl-Net-CIDR.noarch: W: invalid-license Distributable, see COPYING perl-Net-CIDR.src: W: invalid-license Distributable, see COPYING These needs fixing, by changing the license tag to "GPL+ or Artistic" - package and spec file naming OK - package meets guidelines - package is licensed same as perl but license tag needs fixing to reflect this - no upstream license text to include, though the COPYING file refers to the licenses under which the software is licensed, and this file is included - spec file written in English and is legible - source matches upstream - package builds OK in mock for Rawhide x86_64 - buildreqs OK - no locale data, shared or static libs, or devel files to worry about - package not relocatable - no duplicate files or directory ownership issues - %defattr(...) present and correct - %clean section present and correct - macro usage is consistent - code, not content - no large docs - not a GUI app -> no desktop file needed - buildroot cleaned correctly at the start of %install - filenames all ASCII - no scriptlets or subpackages Notes: * License should be "GPL+ or Artistic" * No point including Net-CIDR.spec as %doc * Why use wildcards for single items in %files list: %{perl_vendorlib}/* could be %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/ %{_mandir}/man3/* could be %{_mandir}/man3/Net::CIDR.3pm* This is just a style issue really but IMHO the more explicit entries are more readable and informative Only the license issue is a blocker here. Fix that and I'll approve. -- 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