https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913870
Eugene A. Pivnev <ti.eugene(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(ti.eugene(a)gmail.c |
|om) |
--- Comment #17 from Eugene A. Pivnev <ti.eugene(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #16 and Otto Urpelainen from comment #15)
Ok, let's go next level:
Spec:
https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qvge/qvge.spec
SRPM:
https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qvge/qvge-0.6.2-4.20210405git0fd46...
Koji:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=67573314
My comments:
1. I think the License should be "(MIT and LGPLv3 and BSD)"
After thoughtful reading of "Mixed Source Licensing Scenario" and its
sample I
decided to use 'MIT and (BSD and LGPLv3)' as main sources are MIT-licensed.
2. all the licenses and copyright notices included in %license
Done
3. qvge.appdata.xml must also be updated to list the actual license
that has now been determined
Done
4. Add "BuildRequires: make"
Done
5. add "Requires: shared-mime-info"
Done
6. There is no man page, you should get in contact with the upstream
about adding such
I cannot imagine what to write into manpage.
"man qvge: 'to run qvge just run qvge'"?
It has no any CLI option.
Agreed, although I will note that this is a SHOULD rather than a
MUST, and that help2man can be useful sometimes.
and -h not works too.
7. %check is recommended, perhaps add a comment line there explaining
that upstream does not provide any?
Noted in %check section. It not provides
'make check'
--
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