Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: php-pear Alias: php-pear https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226295 ------- Additional Comments From jorton@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-05 14:02 EST ------- Thanks for the review! Fixed in -4: - upstream do not provide a permanent archive URL for each version of the .phar installer, so there is no URL to provide (yes, I know this sucks). I'll add a comment to this effect - bogus Group - pear.conf marked noreplace; /etc/rpm/macros.* should never be noreplace (and that should be documented by standard not per spec file) Won't fix: - passing -q to %setup has no effect when -T is also used - providing an noop %build adds no value - no idea what the issue with $RPM_SOURCE_DIR is, this has been used in spec files forever - the patches are applied using %{PATCHn} syntax - the license specified in every PEAR class file is indeed v3 not v2.02. There is no accepted policy for the License tag in Fedora yet; there is no point tweaking this on a whim until there is, rpmlint is not definitive on that front Again, the upgrade to the latest upstream is not relevant to the review of the current packaging and need not block the review process. Of course the packaging may change with each new upstream releases, that is always going to be true. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review