Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: aqbanking - A library for online banking functions and financial data import/export https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222522 ------- Additional Comments From notting@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-14 13:51 EST ------- (In reply to comment #16) > Issues: > > 1. Minor: Could include COPYING file? Also, possibly: > AUTHORS Changelog NEWS README TODO Should be in there - see the shenanigans in %install. > 2. Possibly a missing BuildRequires: > > checking for AccountNumberCheck_new in -lktoblzcheck... no > checking ktoblzcheck.h usability... no > checking ktoblzcheck.h presence... no > checking for ktoblzcheck.h... no Not shipped in Core/Extras. If someone wants to maintain it, I can add a buildreq, but I'm not really interested. > 3. According to the COPYING file: > "The banking backend "AqYellowNet" is currently only available binary-only > because of a nondisclosure agreement." > So, should this code just be removed from the source package entirely? > I don't think it's being shipped/linked, but the .so is still in the source. *shrug* We could. It's not like MP3 or something where we remove it so we're not violating any license. > 4. rpmlint says: .. > b) > E: aqbanking zero-length /usr/share/aqbanking/bankinfo/us/bic.idx > E: aqbanking-devel zero-length /usr/share/doc/aqbanking-devel-2.1.0/01-OVERVIEW > > Suggest: Could possibly remove these? Or ping upstream about it. Upstream poked. > 5. Minor: use dist tag? It changes ABI, so it's unlikely to be rebased between releases. But it could be added if needed later. > 6. This is an old version... upstream is at 2.2.8. > Any reason not to upgrade to that version? Want to get stack reviewed, then upgrade stack. > 7. 3 outstanding bugs, might look at the multilib conflicts and see if they > are solveable at this time? 205589 and 228321 are both solved in this package with the split into separate packages. 212518 will be solved with an upgrade. -- 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