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=622630 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-16 16:57:38 EDT --- * A more concise "Summary" can be found directly in the README file: Summary: Programmer's calculator, command line utility * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags * Have you noticed the test suite? * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification Not directly related to the review, but none of the source or documentation files confirms that the GPLv2 (as in file "COPYING") shall be applied. Only the two bison generated files pcalc.c and pcalc.h refer to GPLv3+. $ rpmlint pcalc-2-2.fc14.x86_64.rpm pcalc.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pcalc 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Including the "EXAMPLES" file would make sense. And why not include the "AUTHORS" file, 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review