[Bug 433398] Review Request: synbak - Synbak Universal Backup System (first package, need sponsor)

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=433398





--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla <limb at jcomserv.net>  2008-09-22 16:19:40 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > So, of that, just fix the license tag.
> > A few other things.  The INSTALL mentioned some mandatory programs.  
> > A: You should probably determine the rpms that provide these, and Require them.
> > B: Since you obviously cannot Require Oracle, you should either:
> > i. Create synback-fedora-README.txt explaining that Oracle support is present
> > but won't work unless Oracle is installed.
> 
> Hi Jon,
> 
> I just released 1.2.2 version of synbak.
> 
> - Fixed the license tag (moved synbak from GPLv2 + GPLv3+)
> - Included the README.Fedora (about oracle support licensing) file into doc dir
> - Added all required extra rpm packages to the spec file
> 
> let's me know if it's ok now.

Looks good, but rename README.Fedora to synbak-README.fedora, so multiple SRPMs
on dev systems won't clobber each other.

> SRPM URL:
> http://www.initzero.it/products/opensource/synbak/download/synbak-1.2.2-1.fc9.src.rpm
> 
> the spec file is included into srpm of course, I must provide an external
> version?

It's preferrred.  I won't make a huge deal out of it, some reviewers will, so I
usually do, since I use scripts to put my rpms on my webserver anyway.

> Best Regards

Rename the readme, and the package itself is fine.  Just need to see some
review work, and I can sponsor and approve.

-- 
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.