There is a libc-client package in Core, which would conflict with this package.
Since the UW-IMAP server in itself is not of particular interest compared to
dovecot and cyrus, this leads me to a question : what did you want this package
for ? (no offense intended, heh)

Be assured, this package can install along side Core's libc-client just fine. 
Only imap-devel and libc-client-devel conflict.

OK, I did not check actual file conflict.

Needs work:
* source is not available anymore, please update to 2004g
* Specfile should be in the format %{name}.spec
* Missing SMP flags ( make %{?_smp_mflags} ). If it doesn't build with it,
  please leave a comment
* Duplicate BuildRequires: krb5-devel (required by openssl-devel)
* Let's-Make-Rpmlint-Happy : Summary ends with a dot
* %postun scriptlet for libc-client2004e contains your comment for the next 
scriptlet, and the interpreter is ldconfig, not bash.
* The package should contain the text of the license (in the "CPYRIGHT" file)
* missing dependancy on service (package initscripts) for %post and %postun
* hardcoded /var and /usr in patch0
* hardcoded /etc in the specfile, should be replaced by %{_sysconfdir}. Same
thing for /usr (in %build)
* Prereq is used. It should be Requires(post) and Requires(postun) 
  (Requires(postun) implies Prereq anyway).
* hardcoded /etc in %files, please replace with %{_sysconfdir}

I'm not sure this license will fly. UW is notorious for licensing its
applications without permission to modify (pine), and this license looks similar
to me. I'm putting a stop on this until legal reviews the license.

CPYRIGHT is pretty plain that modified distribution *is* allowed:

(1) modified versions are distributed with source code and
documentation and with permission for others to use any code and
documentation (whether in original or modified versions) as granted
under this license;

(2) if modified, the source code, documentation, and user run-time
elements should be clearly labeled by placing an identifier of origin
(such as a name, initial, or other tag) after the version number;

Now, I consider adding fc/dist_tag sufficient for (2), but we can also it add
(or something else) to the Version if enirely paranoid.

SRPM: http://apt.kde-redhat.org/apt/fedora/all/SRPMS.stable/uw-imap-2004g-1.src.rpm
SPEC: http://apt.kde-redhat.org/apt/fedora/SPECS/uw-imap-2004g-1.spec

%changelog 
* Mon Sep 26 2005 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 2004g-1
- imap-2004g 
- /etc -> %%_sysconfdir
- use %%{?_smp_mflags}
- %%doc CPYRIGHT

Review for version 2004g release 1:
* RPM name is OK
* Source imap-2004g.tar.Z is the same as upstream
* Builds fine in mock
* rpmlints look OK
* File lists look OK
* Work fine

There is still a missing requirement on /sbin/service, since it's used in %post
and %postun. I know that the initscripts package should always be there, but
it's recommended in ScriptletSnippets, so I guess there must be some corner cases...

Please add it and import.

I didn't include /sbin/service because we already have a Requires: xinetd, and
xinetd already requires /sbin/service.

License OK'd by legal.

Cool, thanks.

Imported into cvs.

Changed summary for tracking purposes.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: uw-imap
Updated Fedora Cc: jorton

+comaintainer

Comaintainers need to be in the Owners field for the pkg.acl stuff to work.  Do
you really want to add Joe as a Comaintainer?

(Please set fedora-cvs flag to '?' again with the clarification.  Thanks.)

OK, one more try:

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: uw-imap
Updated Fedora Owners:rdieter.edu,jorton

+comaintainer jorton

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: uw-imap
New Branches: EL-5