Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732419 --- Comment #3 from Kalev Lember <kalevlem...@gmail.com> 2011-08-22 13:01:29 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Rex! (In reply to comment #2) > license: MUST: please review > from my quick looking over, most of the code seems to be dual-licensed: BSD or > LGPLv2 Added a comment in the spec file explaining the dual-licensing. > log4cplus is apache (not sure if that's actually used in the build.. yet) I'm just going to remove the bundled libraries, including log4cplus, in %prep. That way we can be sure that they aren't getting used and it is easier to analyze licensing. > naming: ok > though I have some reservations about the combining of 2 tarball/projects > into one package here, but perhaps that's the upstream design here (i'm > not familiar with it enough to judge). if so, please do add a comment in > the .spec to make that clear. Done. * Mon Aug 22 2011 Kalev Lember <kalevlem...@gmail.com> - 1.3.0-2 - Added a comment explaining the multiple licensing breakdown and the reason for split tarballs (#732419) - Remove bundled libraries in prep Spec URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/esteid-browser-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/esteid-browser-plugin-1.3.0-2.fc15.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
