Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 208051
Summary: | Review Request: dirvish - Fast, disk based, rotating network backup system | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Robert Marcano <robert> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | Flags: | kevin:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-10-06 01:44:57 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Robert Marcano
2006-09-26 03:27:12 UTC
First off, the spec says GPL but the license in certainly not the GPL: Licensed under the Open Software License version 2.0 And as a bonus, v2.0 of that license shouldn't be used. But I think it's still open source; it was version 1.1 that had problems. Also, the actual license needs to be included in the package, since it's present in the tarball. * source files match upstream: 892ec9333b19e623880cdb499443c11b dirvish-1.2.1.tgz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. X license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. X License text included upstream but is not in the final package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (BR: perl is not necessary) * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: dirvish = 1.2.1-1.fc6 = /usr/bin/perl perl(File::Find) perl(Getopt::Long) perl(POSIX) perl(Time::ParseDate) perl(Time::Period) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * not a GUI app. ooooops big mistake.. fixed http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/dirvish/dirvish-1.2.1-2.src.rpm http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/dirvish/dirvish.spec the OSL 2.0 is not recommended any more (it was superceded by version 2.1 and 3.0 but it was approved by the OSI (see http://opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.0.php) Builds fine and looks good. The only issue is that rpmlint is now complaining: W: dirvish invalid-license OSL The license tag accurately describes the license, so this should be OK. APPROVED thanks... Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: dirvish New Branches: EL-5 Owners: robmv cvs done. |