[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 Jan Holcapek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CANTFIX Last Closed||2015-05-02 15:24:25 --- Comment #10 from Jan Holcapek --- Since Spread developers are not willing to re-license to three-clause BSD license, I am giving up the effort to include it in Fedora/EPEL. Instead, I have submitted the package to Rpmfusion just recently: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3601 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #9 from Jan Holcapek --- I have just noticed Spread Open-Source License has already been discussed at legal mailing list, yet so far the license seems not to considered a Good license as per [1]. However, the final decision has not been made, and I am about to reach out to Spread Concepts regarding the possibility of re-licensing Spread framework to the three-clause BSD license, as suggested at [2]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2014-March/002429.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081
--- Comment #8 from Jan Holcapek ---
(In reply to Lubomir Rintel from comment #7)
> 0.) Please package a more recent version.
>
> 4.3.0 seems already available.
I understand your concern, however, this is intentional: the reason why I
decided to package spread (in this particular version) was to encourage the
undisclosed vendor of undisclosed (proprietary) database system to not ship
spread 4.2.0 binaries as part of their (messy) RPM, but rather rely on
soon-to-be-part-of-Fedora/EPEL package of its own.
If you are not strongly against, I would packge version 4.2.0 first, and push
an update to 4.3.0 only then.
> 1.) Source can not be downloaded
>
> > spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189,
> > http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628
> > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
>
> Please don't use the URL in Source tag then, but in a comment instead:
>
> # Download it from: http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz
> Source0: %{name}-src-%{version}.tar.gz
Fixed: relative Source0, comment w/ download URL.
> 2.) Why do you ship static package?
>
> Static linking is strongly discouraged and should be avoided whenever
> possible.
Fixed: no -static package.
> 3.) Why do you override docdir with pkgdocdir?
>
> Apart from that it won't build with older RPM (such as in el7 and older),
> it's not a very usual thing to do and result in path names that are not
> stable across package releases.
Fixed.
> 4.) Libraries are shipped in -devel packages
>
> You probably want to include in the main or -libs package. That will need
> moving the ldconfig scriptlets as well.
Fixed: -devel package w/ headers only, -libs package w/ shared libs.
> (In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #5)
> > Regargind the invalid-license warning: I've dropped a question to
> > le...@lists.fedoraproject.org asking whether Spread Open Source License is
> > suitable for a Fedora package.
>
> Thanks. I believe they are merely clarifying the legal matters without
> changing the meaning and their advertising clause is very 4-clause BSDish,
> therefore it should be fine for Fedora as long as nothing GPLed links to it.
> Adding FE_LEGAL dependency.
That's good news.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081
Lubomir Rintel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal)
--- Comment #7 from Lubomir Rintel ---
0.) Please package a more recent version.
4.3.0 seems already available.
1.) Source can not be downloaded
> spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189,
> http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Please don't use the URL in Source tag then, but in a comment instead:
# Download it from: http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz
Source0: %{name}-src-%{version}.tar.gz
2.) Why do you ship static package?
Static linking is strongly discouraged and should be avoided whenever possible.
3.) Why do you override docdir with pkgdocdir?
Apart from that it won't build with older RPM (such as in el7 and older), it's
not a very usual thing to do and result in path names that are not stable
across package releases.
4.) Libraries are shipped in -devel packages
You probably want to include in the main or -libs package. That will need
moving the ldconfig scriptlets as well.
(In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #5)
> Regargind the invalid-license warning: I've dropped a question to
> le...@lists.fedoraproject.org asking whether Spread Open Source License is
> suitable for a Fedora package.
Thanks. I believe they are merely clarifying the legal matters without changing
the meaning and their advertising clause is very 4-clause BSDish, therefore it
should be fine for Fedora as long as nothing GPLed links to it. Adding FE_LEGAL
dependency.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lkund...@v3.sk Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #6 from Jan Holcapek --- (In reply to Jan Holcapek from comment #1) > spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189, > http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628 This is due to registration form to be filled in to download the tarball. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #5 from Jan Holcapek --- Regargind the invalid-license warning: I've dropped a question to le...@lists.fedoraproject.org asking whether Spread Open Source License is suitable for a Fedora package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #4 from Jan Holcapek --- $ rpmlint spread-static-4.2.0-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm spread-static.x86_64: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #3 from Jan Holcapek --- $ rpmlint spread-devel-4.2.0-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm spread-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on spread/spread-libs/libspread spread-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread-devel.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libspread.so.3.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 spread-devel.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man3/SP_multicast.3.gz 28: warning: macro `TB' not defined spread-devel.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man3/FL_multicast.3.gz 50: warning: macro `TB' not defined 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #1 from Jan Holcapek --- $ rpmlint spread-4.2.0-1.fc19.src.rpm spread.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Spread spread.src: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread.src: W: file-size-mismatch spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 736189, http://www.spread.org/download/spread-src-4.2.0.tar.gz = 2628 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1077081] Review Request: spread - cluster messaging toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077081 --- Comment #2 from Jan Holcapek --- $ rpmlint spread-4.2.0-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm spread.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Spread spread.x86_64: W: invalid-license Spread Open Source License spread.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary flush_user 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
