[Bug 1961133] Review Request: alligator - Kirigami-based RSS reader
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961133 --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/alligator -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1961133] Review Request: alligator - Kirigami-based RSS reader
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961133 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- (In reply to Onuralp SEZER from comment #2) > (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #1) > > How do we know which licenses apply from the provided ones? > > > > > > *No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public Domain Dedication > > -- > > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/CC0-1.0.txt > > > > *No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 3 > > > > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL.txt > > > > BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License > > - > > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/BSD-2-Clause.txt > > > > GNU General Public License, Version 2 > > - > > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/GPL-2.0-only.txt > > > > > > The Appdata file specifies GPLv2+ > > > > GPL-2.0-or-later > > > > And Flathub says the same: > > > > License > > GPL-2.0-or-later > > > > > > Please correct the license to match this, and clarify with upstream which > > license files do apply. > > > > > > > As I understand all files has ; > > * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only OR > LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL > > > So that means we can use something like this : > > "License: GPLv2 or GPLv3" Ok I,ll let you fix this before import. Package appproved. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1961133] Review Request: alligator - Kirigami-based RSS reader
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961133 --- Comment #2 from Onuralp SEZER --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #1) > How do we know which licenses apply from the provided ones? > > > *No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public Domain Dedication > -- > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/CC0-1.0.txt > > *No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 3 > > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL.txt > > BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License > - > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/BSD-2-Clause.txt > > GNU General Public License, Version 2 > - > alligator-21.05/LICENSES/GPL-2.0-only.txt > > > The Appdata file specifies GPLv2+ > > GPL-2.0-or-later > > And Flathub says the same: > > License > GPL-2.0-or-later > > > Please correct the license to match this, and clarify with upstream which > license files do apply. > > > As I understand all files has ; * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only OR LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL So that means we can use something like this : "License: GPLv2 or GPLv3" > > > Congrats on you Mindshare seat! Thank you ! :) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1961133] Review Request: alligator - Kirigami-based RSS reader
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1961133
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
How do we know which licenses apply from the provided ones?
*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public Domain Dedication
--
alligator-21.05/LICENSES/CC0-1.0.txt
*No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 3
alligator-21.05/LICENSES/LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL.txt
BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License
-
alligator-21.05/LICENSES/BSD-2-Clause.txt
GNU General Public License, Version 2
-
alligator-21.05/LICENSES/GPL-2.0-only.txt
The Appdata file specifies GPLv2+
GPL-2.0-or-later
And Flathub says the same:
License
GPL-2.0-or-later
Please correct the license to match this, and clarify with upstream which
license files do apply.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License",
"*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public Domain
Dedication", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "*No copyright*
GNU General Public License, Version 3". 88 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/alligator/review-alligator/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
desktop-file-validate if there is su
