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=645760 Gianluca Sforna <giallu@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |giallu@xxxxxxxxx Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | AssignedTo|guillermo.gomez@xxxxxxxxx |giallu@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Gianluca Sforna <giallu@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-11-19 17:25:33 EST --- As requested, picking up this review. Also, FE-NEEDSPONSOR is not needed anymore. Let's start from the basics. The md5 for the tarball in your src.rpm does not match the upstream one. Please be sure to include in the srpm the unmodified tar.gz from upstream. The easiest way is to use "spectool -g django-ajax-selects.spec" to download it. Upstream looks a bit confused about licensing: pypi lists lgpl, google code MIT, while the LICENSE.txt claims it's dual licensed MIT and GPL. However, what counts is what's actually in the tarball, so please advice him to include the licenses text in the package and, preferably, add an header on each source file with the indication of the license. Our License: tag should be "MIT or GPL+" since dual licensing means you can choose which one to apply (so the "or") and not stating explicitly which GPL version to use means you can pick any. Of course, upstream can consider to clear this up in a later release. The rest of the spec file looks fine, I'll probably have more remarks after a build. -- 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