[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=709328

--- Comment #16 from Ivan Romanov <drizt@xxxxxxx> 2011-06-16 11:43:16 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> The rpmlint output is 548 lines long, that's why I've attached it.
> 
> Some initial issues:
> 
> The License declaration GPLv2+1 doesn't exist. The file src/main.cpp is GPLv2+.
> What does the additional "1" mean?
This is jusr misspeling. Actually it used GPLv2, LGPLv2 and BeerWare licenses. 

> Where do you've got the skins, icons and themes from? I don't see any licensing info about them.
This difficult question. Developers of Psi+ don't care about license cleaning.
Sad but true. I trying to find sources of this resources. 

> And moreover, why do you use them as additional sources and
> split them again into subpackages? In my mind, it would be better to package
> them separately, because the main package doesn't need them mandatory.
Often this resources updates. By this reason I always build one common package.
It's more comfortable for me. It's difficult to wathcing for updates resources.

> You can "qt-devel" drop from BuildRequires, the "qtwebkit-devel" depends on it
> anyway.
Old version of Fedora haven't qtwebkit-devel package. While I want to have a
compatible with it.

> psi-plus.desktop isn't properly installed, look here:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
Oh damn :(. Sources have a psi.desktop file. When is bening installed this file
copying with name psi-plus.desktop in application dir. I don't know what I
should do in such case. Is maybe desktop-file-validate can help me?

> The FSF address is incorrect in the source files. Not worth a patch, but worth
> a upstream bug report tough.
I have talk with Rion (upstream developer). It don't interesting for him.

> If you would call %configure instead of ./configure, you could drop the four
> lines which define the macros for install locations.
I might use only ./configure. It non-auntoconf ./configure. qconf-qt4 generates
non-compatible ./configure script.

-- 
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


[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]