https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2174227 --- Comment #3 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- Looks pretty good already, with only some small small issues: 1. Superfluous License tag in the libimagequant-devel subpackage: This built package contains only a symlink, a header, and a pkgconfig file. Since there are no binaries in this subpackage, the license tag can just be inherited from the source package and does not need to be specified in the -devel subpackage. This means you also don't need a separate macro for the library_license. I suggest that you look at rust-rpm-sequoia for how modern Rust packaging handles the package license: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-rpm-sequoia/blob/rawhide/f/rust-rpm-sequoia.spec If you use the %cargo_license or %cargo_license_summary macros for generating the license information for the statically linked binary, you will need to bump the rust-packaging dependency from >= 21 to >= 23, since the macros were only added with that version. 2. The description says "dual-licensed like pngquant", but the license metadata is just "GPL-3.0-or-later". To me those two pieces of information are contradictory, please check which one is correct. If it turns out that the metadata in Cargo.toml is indeed incomplete, please patch Cargo.toml to fix it (%cargo_license* macros read this metadata to generate the license summaries, so it's important to not only fix the License tag in the spec file, but also to fix it in the crate metadata itself). 3. Is the ABI of "old" libimagequant (v2) the same as the one provided by the "new" one built in this package? If the ABI has changed, you will need to rebuild any dependent packages once you submit this package to Fedora (assuming the APIs are the same ...). (This is not a blocker for the review, just a note that you will need to take this into account when building the package). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2174227 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
