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=627032 --- Comment #4 from elad <el.il@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-03-28 15:57:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > http://scop.fedorapeople.org/packages/w3c-linkchecker.spec > http://scop.fedorapeople.org/packages/w3c-linkchecker-4.7-1.fc16.src.rpm > > * Mon Mar 28 2011 Ville Skyttà <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> - 4.7-1 > - Update to 4.7, update dependencies. > - Remove spec file constructs no longer needed in F-14+ and EL-6+. > > (In reply to comment #2) > > > w3c-linkchecker.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dereferenceable -> > > teleconference > > Bogus message from the spell checker, won't fix. Ok. > > > w3c-linkchecker.src: E: unknown-key (MD5 > > Not an issue, it's just signed with my key which isn't known to your system > (and the package will not include my signature once it's in Fedora). Anyway, > the 4.7-1 srpm is not signed. Ok, but review request rpms are usually not signed. > > > w3c-linkchecker.src: W: invalid-url Source0: > > http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/S/SC/SCOP/W3C-LinkChecker-4.6.tar.gz HTTP Error > > 404: Not Found > > Updated to 4.7. > > > 1. Please ask upstream to include the license in the tarball. > > Already done a long time ago (for w3c-markup-validator but the copyright holder > is the same), no reply received: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qa-dev/2010Jul/0004.html > > > 2. Upstream does not provide md5 sum or any other hash for the tar.gz file. > > Please report a bug in the upstream and ask them to add an md5sum. > > I'm curious, where does this requirement come from? Anyway, won't fix, this is > intentional, and note also that I'm pretty much the upstream for this package. > If you wish, the expanded tarball contents can be verified with "cpansign" > (from the perl-Module-Signature package). > I'm not sure if it is a requirement, but it is recommended. The person that will do the official review will probably give you a better answer. > > 3. rpmlint couldn't find the Source URL because it is no longer avilable in > > upstream. Please update the package to the latest version. > > Done. > > > 4. Do not place files in /var/www. Please read: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Web_Applications > > This would mean that I'd have to package configuration files for all web > servers this could be run with, whereas I believe most of them execute CGI > scripts from /var/www/cgi-bin out of the box and there's no other location that > would provide the same functionality without additional configuration. This > would get too messy for my taste (config file maintenance, duplicate config dir > ownership or dependency or subpackage hell, note that this can also be run > without a web server) - if this is a requirement for the package to pass > review, I will most likely cancel the submission. This IS required, sorry. You won't need configuration for every web server, you can select just few common ones or put a simple file somewhere in /usr/share and write in a readme file or a manual that it should be copied to the appropriate directory. (and i'm sure there are other solution for this issue) > > > 1. Clean section is not required for Fedora 13 or above. > > Removed stuff that's not required for F-14+ and EL-6+. Usually I leave those > in intentionally so that packages work unmodified for example on EL-5, but this > one has dependencies to newer versions of things than EL-5 has so it won't work > anyway. > > > 2. I'm not sure about it, but I think the upstream URL should be > > http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ > > Read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Perl#URL_tag for more info. > > Not changed, what's in the current package is its official home page URL, and > even though this is distributed from CPAN, it's not a usual perl module > package. > I think it's ok then. > ---- > > Actually, when I think about it now, I will post to fedora-devel to see if > someone else would be interested in finishing the review and be the maintainer. > I haven't been actually using the packaged version of this in a while (I use > the online service or my local bleeding edge setup for developing it), and that > doesn't make me a suitable package manintainer for the package in Fedora. > Unless someone picks it up in a few weeks, I'll cancel the submission. I'm sorry to hear that. Hope you'll find someone else to maintain it. -- 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