https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801519 Elliott Sales de Andrade <quantum.analyst@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |quantum.analyst@xxxxxxxxx Blocks| |182235 (FE-Legal) Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |quantum.analyst@xxxxxxxxx Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade <quantum.analyst@xxxxxxxxx> --- Technically many of these licenses are themselves "All Rights Reserved", and part of the data, so not covered by the license of the code itself. I'm not sure how to tag this in License though. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. Note: License file identify_license is not marked as %license See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache License (v2.0)", "Apache License (v2.0)", "Apache License (v2.0) Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Public License (v2.0)", "do What The Fuck you want to Public License Apache License (v2.0) GNU Affero General Public License", "Apache License (v2.0) Creative Commons Attribution Public License (v1.0)", "*No copyright* Academic Free License (v1.1)", "*No copyright* Academic Free License (v1.2)", "Academic Free License (v1.2)", "*No copyright* Academic Free License (v2.0)", "Academic Free License (v2.0)", "*No copyright* Academic Free License (v2.1)", "Academic Free License (v2.1)", "*No copyright* Academic Free License (v3.0)", "Academic Free License (v3.0)", "GNU Affero General Public License (v1)", "*No copyright* AGPL (v3 or later)", "GNU Affero General Public License (v3)", "Apache License (v1.1)", "*No copyright* Artistic License", "Artistic License (v2.0)", "*No copyright* BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "*No copyright* BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "*No copyright* BSD 4-clause "Original" or "Old" License", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License", "*No copyright* Boost Software License (v1.0) Boost Software License 1.0", "*No copyright* Beerware License", "Creative Commons Attribution Public License (v1.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution Public License (v2.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution Public License (v2.5)", "Creative Commons Attribution Public License (v4.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Public License (v1.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Public License (v2.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Public License (v2.5)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Public License (v4.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Public License (v1.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives Public License (v2.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Public License (v2.5)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives Public License (v4.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike Public License (v1.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike Public License (v2.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike Public License (v2.5)", "Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike Public License (v4.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives Public License (v1.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives Public License (v2.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives Public License (v2.5)", "Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives Public License (v4.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Public License (v1.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Public License (v2.0)", "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Public License (v2.5)", "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Public License (v4.0)", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Public License (v1.0)", "Common Development and Distribution License (v1.0)", "Common Development and Distribution License (v1.1)", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License (v1.1)", "Eclipse Public License (v1.0)", "*No copyright* Eclipse Public License (v2.0)", "FreeType License", "*No copyright* GPL (v1 or later)", "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)", "*No copyright* GPL (v3 or later)", "*No copyright* ISC License", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v2)", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License (v2.1 or later)", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License (v3 or later)", "*No copyright* Expat License", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License (v1.0)", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License (v2.0)", "Microsoft Public License", "Mozilla Public License (v1.1)", "*No copyright* SIL Open Font License (v1.1)", "Academic Free License", "PostgreSQL License", "Python Software Foundation License version 2", "Q Public License (v1.0)", "SGI Free Software License B (v1.0)", "SGI Free Software License B (v1.1)", "*No copyright* SGI Free Software License B (v1.1)", "SGI Free Software License B (v2.0)", "Unicode Terms of Use", "do What The Fuck you want to Public License (v2)", "Expat License", "*No copyright* zlib/libpng license", "zlib/libpng License with Acknowledgement". 93 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in 1801519-golang-github-google-licenseclassifier/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. Note: Macros in: golang-github-google-licenseclassifier (description) [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [?]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [?]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 6 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: golang-github-google-licenseclassifier-0-0.1.20200211git9dfa8d8.fc33.x86_64.rpm golang-github-google-licenseclassifier-0-0.1.20200211git9dfa8d8.fc33.src.rpm golang-github-google-licenseclassifier.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary identify_license golang-github-google-licenseclassifier.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary license_serializer golang-github-google-licenseclassifier.src: E: specfile-error warning: -u use in %forgemeta is deprecated, use -z instead to select a separate set of rpm variables! 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: golang-github-google-licenseclassifier-debuginfo-0-0.1.20200211git9dfa8d8.fc33.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- golang-github-google-licenseclassifier.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary identify_license golang-github-google-licenseclassifier.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary license_serializer 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/google/licenseclassifier/archive/9dfa8d8474eb60a626d9f8439362e49b1c3dca54/licenseclassifier-9dfa8d8474eb60a626d9f8439362e49b1c3dca54.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b590faef458d89340445206ba728ab6218bdf6923521a1c0101d8a78676e9aed CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b590faef458d89340445206ba728ab6218bdf6923521a1c0101d8a78676e9aed Requires -------- golang-github-google-licenseclassifier (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- golang-github-google-licenseclassifier: golang-github-google-licenseclassifier golang-github-google-licenseclassifier(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.4 (54fa030) last change: 2019-12-07 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1801519 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Haskell, R, PHP, Java, Perl, fonts, C/C++, Ocaml, Python, SugarActivity Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
