https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813563 --- Comment #5 from Mattia Verga <mattia.verga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the review, but I don't agree with all points: > - LICENSE file reports a GPLv3 I've reported upstream that LICENSE file (GPLv3+) is incoherent wit copyright file (GPLv2+) > - incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.3-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc ['1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33', '1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc'] I'll fix it > - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided > in the spec URL. > Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in > /home/sagitter/1813563-libpasraw/diff.txt > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ I'll fix it > - Please, create a devel subpackage and include an symbolic link `libpasraw.so` pointed to `libpasraw.so.1.1` > The source code should generate/include header files too, and installed together the unversioned library. > Ask to upstream. Why? The package doesn't create an unversioned library and there's no need for it or for a -devel subpackage. > - Use the patch to not install anything under `share/doc/libpasraw`, use only %doc to mark the documentation files. > - Linker flags are not used; use a patch like that attached and set the LDLAGS. Thanks for the patch > - This package provides a library earlier included in `libpasastro-1.2.*`; i guess it's better this way: > > new `libpasastro = 1.3.0-1` must > > BuildRequires: libpasraw-devel >= 0:1.3.0-1 > Requires: libpasraw%{?_isa} >= 0:1.3.0-1 > > meanwhile, `libpasraw = 1.3.0-1` will be always installed because needed by new `libpasastro >= 1.3.0-1`, > so it won't be ever **in conflict** with `libpasastro < 1.3.0-1` because they're never installed at the same time. I don't see the rationale for this. We have a packaging guideline that covers this case: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Conflicts/#_splitting_packages If the new package should be installable independently of whether the original package is installed, a versioned conflict is allowed -- 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
