[Bug 874184] Review Request: peervpn - A VPN software using full mesh network topology

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874184

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek at redhat.com> ---
tl;dr version:
The package looks good to me. Please consider testing out and packaging the
0.29 version. It would also be nice to submit the service file to upstream, but
this doesn't block the review. Please upgrade to the latest version and I'll
approve.

According to the checlist found at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines:
* [PASS] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the
build produces. The output should be posted in the review.
 - the rpmlint results are sane and well explained
* [PASS] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines .
 - peervpn is acceptable
* [PASS] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
 - peervpn.spec
* [PASS] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
* [PASS] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines .
 - GPLv3+ is OK and matches the license text on the package home page
* [PASS] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
* [PASS] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
 - license.txt is included
* [PASS] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
* [PASS] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
* [PASS] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this
task as it is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream
URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for
how to deal with this.
 - the sha256sum of both is
9d80bfbdc2aad9c6ab2771887c7c97345bf481be3f35bb0f4517c2372461e58c
* [PASS] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one primary architecture.
 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4684515
* [N/A] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
* [PASS] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
* [N/A] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
 - there is no localization neither does the package require gettext
* [N/A] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
* [PASS] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
* [N/A] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
* [PASS] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does
not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which
does create that directory.
* [PASS] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
* [PASS] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be
set with executable permissions, for example.
* [PASS] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
* [PASS] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
* [N/A] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
* [PASS] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present.
* [N/A] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
* [N/A] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package.
* [N/A] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the
base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
* [PASS] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must
be removed in the spec if they are built.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.