Hi,
in the following review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285042
a package was reviewed and approved under the name "kpmcore", which matches
how upstream calls its tarballs. However, the subject line incorrectly
spelled the name as "KPMcore" in camel-case, which was not caught during
review, and so when the package was created in pkgdb, the submitter
accidentally requested the module as "KPMcore". Unfortunately, the automated
checks apparently do not notice mismatches between the specfile name and the
subject line, and neither did the reviewer.
In addition, since nobody reviewed that rename, it also does not handle
Provides correctly, there isn't even a Provides for the correct name.
So I would like to ask:
* How can this particular package get fixed? I sure hope the answer is not
to stick to the incorrect camel-case name forever! Can the administrators
please look into this?
* Can we add some additional sanity checks to prevent this from happening
again in the future? I guess the issue there is that specfile links do not
necessarily contain the file name in the link or even contain it, they can
be fpaste links, links into some SCM viewer, etc. We would also need to
check the latest specfile link, not the first, because sometimes, package
names are fixed as part of the review process. But if we can find a
solution that does not break current use cases, I think it would be very
helpful.
Kevin Kofler