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: python-daap - A DAAP client implemented in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215659 ------- Additional Comments From matthias@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-19 05:34 EST ------- rpmlint output on the source rpm : W: python-daap mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 15) rpmlint output on the binary rpm is ok. The spec file and resulting packages seem to comply with all MUST review items. The only part which is quite vague is the LICENSE. The author has made a statement about relicensing under the LGPL, but : 1) The source tarball for 0.5 still doesn't contain the LICENSE file 2) The PKG-INFO file still contains "License: UNKNOWN" 3) The sources contain two files (md5c.c and md5.h) which were taken from the Python sources and have their own "RSA Data Security, Inc." license. Points 1) and 2) could be easily dealt with by sending a quick patch to the author. The most surprizing part is that the LICENSE file is actually in the svn trunk, and has been for a while, but was skipped when making the 0.5 release it seems. Point 3) is a bit trickier, as I have no idea if that license is actually LGPL compatible or not (I would think it is, though). If it isn't, then we have a problem. If it is, then simply adding a note about "Parts of the software are derived from the RSA Data Security, Inc. MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm" + possibly a copy of the RSA terms should be enough. -- 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