https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086484 --- Comment #1 from Carl George 🤠 <carl@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Here are the things I've noticed that need to be fixed. =============================================================================== The licensecheck utility found multiple files under different licenses. These all must be reflected in the License field. There also must be a comment explaining the multiple license breakdown. Public Domain: contrib/colorschemes/zenburn.neomuttrc pgpewrap.c docs/mbox.5 MIT: contrib/colorschemes/neonwolf-256.neomuttrc test/acutest.h BSD: autosetup/mutt-gettext.tcl autosetup/mutt-iconv.tcl contrib/hcache-bench/neomutt-hcache-bench.sh mutt/queue.h Unlicense: contrib/keybase/ https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_field =============================================================================== Remove the BugURL line. The Fedora build system (koji) will set this to https://bugz.fedoraproject.org/<packagename>, which redirects to a list of open bugzilla bugs. I can't find any documentation about this, but you can verify it on a Fedora system by running `rpm -q --qf '%{bugurl}\n' <anypackagename>`. =============================================================================== It is recommended to follow the following format for the Source URL. -Source: https://github.com/neomutt/neomutt/archive/%{version}.tar.gz +Source: https://github.com/neomutt/neomutt/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/#_git_tags =============================================================================== Each patch should have a comment about their upstream status, or justification why they are downstream-only. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/PatchUpstreamStatus/ =============================================================================== No C compiler is listed as a build requirement. The build currently works because the perl build requirement recursively pulls in gcc, but this is not guaranteed to always be the case. Add `BuildRequires: gcc`. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/#_buildrequires_and_requires https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#compiler =============================================================================== The conditional _pkgdocdir macro definition can be removed. That's already defined on all maintained versioned of Fedora and RHEL. =============================================================================== The invocations of ./configure, make, and make install should be replaced by the standardized macro equivalents of %configure, %make_build, and %make_install. This will allow the removal of --sysconfdir, _smp_mflags, and DESTDIR, as those are already included in the macros. =============================================================================== The license file should be marked as %license, not %doc. This ensures the license is included even when the transaction flag nodocs is set. -%doc *.md +%license LICENSE.md +%doc AUTHORS.md ChangeLog.md INSTALL.md README.md SECURITY.md https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text =============================================================================== The package places files in /usr/libexec/neomutt/, but it doesn't own that directory. The easiest fix it to just have %files own that directory recursively. It should also be referenced as %{_libexecdir}. -/usr/libexec/neomutt/pgpewrap -/usr/libexec/neomutt/smime_keys +%{_libexecdir}/neomutt/ -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086484 _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
