https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2308448 --- Comment #20 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- Package looks mostly good now. Two minor issues: 1. Please document why clang-libs dependency is necessary, for example like this: ``` # dependency for bundled vendored crate BuildRequires: clang-libs ``` When switching away from building with vendored dependencies, that will make it obvious that this can be removed at that point. 2. The license summary is still not documented in the spec file, only the resulting License tag. While I think this is no longer strictly required, documenting it this way makes it *much* easier to update the License tag when packaging new versions (or, in this case, when updating the vendor tarball). I would suggest to do something like this: ``` # rublk and crate dependencies: # ============================= # 0BSD OR MIT OR Apache-2.0 # Apache-2.0 OR BSL-1.0 # Apache-2.0 OR MIT # Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT # BSD-3-Clause # GPL-2.0-or-later # MIT # MIT OR Apache-2.0 # MIT OR Zlib OR Apache-2.0 # MPL-2.0+ # Unlicense OR MIT # code derived from Unicode data: # Unicode-DFS-2016 (in regex-syntax) License: (0BSD OR MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND (Apache-2.0 OR BSL-1.0) AND (Apache-2.0 OR MIT) AND (Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT) AND BSD-3-Clause AND GPL-2.0-or-later AND MIT AND (MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND (MIT OR Zlib OR Apache-2.0) AND MPL-2.0+ AND (Unlicense OR MIT) AND Unicode-DFS-2016 # LICENSE.dependencies contains a full license breakdown ``` Additionally, there's some duplication in the License tag. For example, "(Apache-2.0 OR MIT)" and "(MIT OR Apache-2.0)" are equivalent, you can drop one of them. === When do you plan to start submitting missing review requests for the missing dependencies? -- 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=2308448 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202308448%23c20 -- _______________________________________________ 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
