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=708934 --- Comment #5 from VÃt Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-05-31 07:24:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > > Imho in license should be postgresql instead of BSD. > > > > I have explicitly asked upstream about versions and they state that the content > > of BSD file is wrong, but the BSD license is correct. The upstream issue is > > referenced in .spec file, so I think we should be OK. > > > From your comment (License is not that clear) isn't clear, that you have > statement from upstream. Sometimes is in specfile included email, where was > license claimed. I would expect that reviewer could click on the link on the same line to see what is going on, but my expectations might be overly high. > And you should fix new rpmlint complaints: > rpmlint rubygem-pg-doc-0.11.0-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm > rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGconn/nonblocking%3f-i.yaml %3f > rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGconn/internal_encoding%3d-i.yaml %3d > rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGresult/%5b%5d-i.yaml %5b > rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGresult/%5b%5d-i.yaml %5d These warnings needs to be ignored, since these are valid documentation file names. The filenames are derived from method names, which can contain characters such as []!= > Also license is not packaged in any of sub-packages. It is not required, since the subpackage requires the base package. This is quote form guidelines: If a subpackage is dependent (either implicitly or explicitly) upon a base package (where a base package is defined as a resulting binary package from the same source RPM which contains the appropriate license texts as %doc), it is not necessary for that subpackage to also include those license texts as %doc. -- 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