[Bug 424881] Review Request: fontmatrix - Font manager

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: fontmatrix - Font manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=424881


wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro changed:

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




------- Additional Comments From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro  2007-12-20 12:27 EST -------
There is a suggestion that I would like to make before the formal review: use
"svn export" instead of checkout, because otherwise all files will have
incorrect timestamps (they get the time of the checkout instead of their
original timestamp)
Please also note that the command listed in the spec ( cmake ../fontmatrix  &&
make package_source ) did not work for me because cmake fails with 
        -- Building Fontmatrix 0.3.0svn
         CMake Error: Qt qmake not found!
        -- Configuring done
 qt4-x11 does not provide qmake.

Package Review
==============

Key:
 - = N/A
 x = Check
 ! = Problem
 ? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
 [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
 [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec.
 [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
 [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
     Tested on: x86_64
 [x] Rpmlint output:
fontmatrix.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.3.0-2.r253.fc8
0.3.0-2.r253.fc9
--> I suggest dropping the ".fc8" from the changelog entries (or using %dist),
otherwise all rpms but the fc8 one will exhibit this message
 [x] Package is not relocatable.
 [x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
 [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     License type:GPLv2
     Actual license: GPLv2+
 [x] 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 is included in %doc.
 [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
 [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
     Verified by using
        svn co -r 253 http://svn.gna.org/svn/undertype/trunk/tools/typotek
        tar xzf fontmatrix-0.3.0-Source.tar.gz
        diff -r typotek fontmatrix-0.3.0-Source/
 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
 [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [-] The spec file handles locales properly.
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
 [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
 [x] Permissions on files are set properly.
 [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
 [x] Package consistently uses macros.
 [x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
 [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
 [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
 [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
 [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
 [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
 [x] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
 [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.

=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
 [x] Latest version is packaged.
 [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
 [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
 [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
     Tested on: devel/x86_64 by me and in koji by the original submitter
 [x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
     Tested on:ppc,ppc64,i386,x86_64
 [x] Package functions as described.
 [x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
 [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
 [-] File based requires are sane.


=== Issues ===
1. timestamps from svn are not preserved
2. according to the .h/.ccp files which are included, license should be GPLv2+
3. there is a duplicate BuildRequires: qt4-x11 is already brought in by qt4-devel


As I don't see any major problems, the package is APPROVED but please correct
the above issues and especially the license tag before uploading to cvs.


-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.