[Bug 1295667] Review Request: erlang-proper - A QuickCheck-inspired property-based testing tool for Erlang

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295667

Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com> ---
[+] rpmlint is silent (or produces only messages which can be safely ignored):

lemenkov ~/Downloads: rpmlint erlang-proper-1.1-1.fc24.*
erlang-proper.x86_64: E: no-binary
erlang-proper.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
lemenkov ~/Downloads: 

[+] The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[+] The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.

[-] The License field in the package spec file is wrong. It must contain GPLv3+
since the package licensed under "GPLv3 or any later version" (see the
sources).

[+] The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is
included in %doc.
[+] The spec file is written in American English.
[+] The spec file for the package is legible.
[+] The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.

lemenkov ~/Downloads: sha256sum v1.1.tar.gz*
d5d5641366cba6ced3cde3b48af5fd732236f20fd8a8d77ea1bad25b5b89b20b  v1.1.tar.gz
d5d5641366cba6ced3cde3b48af5fd732236f20fd8a8d77ea1bad25b5b89b20b  v1.1.tar.gz.1
lemenkov ~/Downloads: 

[+] The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms. See koji
links above.
[+] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
[0] No need to handle locales.
[0] The package does not contain any shared library files.
[+] Packages does not bundle copies of system libraries.
[+] The package isn't designed to be relocatable.
[+] The package owns all directories that it creates.
[+] The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
[+] Permissions on files are set properly.
[+] The package consistently uses macros.
[+] The package contains code, or permissible content.
[0] No large documentation files.
[+] Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
[0] No static libraries.
[0] No -devel sub-package.
[+] The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
[0] Not a GUI application.
[+] The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.


APPROVED.

-- 
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