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=472150 --- Comment #73 from Jessica Jones <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-05 09:39:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #72) > (In reply to comment #69) > > > > - = N/A > > / = Check > > x = Problem > > ? = Not evaluated > > > > === REQUIRED ITEMS === > > [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > > License type: "Mostly GPLv3, some GLPv2+, some LGPLv3." (from website) is > > not quite the same as "GPLv3+ and LGPLv2" (from spec file) > > I double checked the licenses on all the header/source files, and only the > CCP4MG code (in ccp4mg-utils) and the libcoot-surface library (which depends on > the libccp4mg library) use LGPLv2+ code. All the other code is GPLv3+ according > to the headers and COPYING file. My guess is the website is slightly outdated > (I pointed out to upstream the varying licenses in the source, and the code > headers and files were updated a few months ago). Fair enough. I didn't look at the code itself, assuming instead that the project website would be up to date. > > > [X] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. > > done. > > > [X] %check is present and the tests pass > > I've added a %check, but it fails (there are several errors in the test code). > I'll talk with upstream and try to get this fixed for 0.6.2, but let me know if > this is a show-stopper and I'll make a patch for the broken tests. It isn't a show-stopper but needs to either be commented out (with an appropriate comment) or patched. > Also, you mentioned a failed build on EL5 - do you have the log? Not to hand, but I'll through the new SRPM through koji again with EPEL as the target. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review