[Bug 249034] Review Request: sundials - nonlinear differential/algebraic solvers from LLNL

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: sundials - nonlinear differential/algebraic solvers from LLNL


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249034





------- Additional Comments From debarshi.ray@xxxxxxxxx  2007-08-03 16:58 EST -------
+------------------------+
| FORMAL REVIEW (contd.) |
+------------------------+

* Due to a change in the Licensing Guidelines
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines) the value of the
License tag, should be filled with the appropriate license Short License
identifier(s) from the "Good License" tables on the Fedora Licensing
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing) page.

"BSD-style" is not one of the accepted values for the License tag.

* Your usage of macros is inconsistent. eg., you have used %{name}-%{version} in
Source0 while using hard-coded strings in Patch0; you have used both %{_libdir}
and %_libdir to refer to directories; etc..

A possible solution would be to use:
Patch0: %{name}-ltmain.patch
...and decide on whether to use the braces ('{' '}') or not while referring to
directories.

Consistency is necessary for QA and usability. See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

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