[Bug 615848] Review Request: oflb-brettfont-fonts - A handwriting font

[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=615848

--- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur at gmail.com> 2010-07-19 07:05:26 EDT ---
+ OK
- NA
? ISSUE

? Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
+ Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistant macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
+ License
+ License field in spec matches
+ License file included in package
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
- Sources match upstream md5sum:

- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
? Package has a correct %clean section.
? Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- .la files are removed.

- Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file

+ Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
+ Package has no duplicate files in %files.
+ Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
+ Package owns all the directories it creates.
? No rpmlint output.

SHOULD Items:

+ Should build in mock.
- Should build on all supported archs
- Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
+ Should have dist tag
- Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)

Issues:

1. The ttf name is BrettFont1.1.ttf

Any particular reason why you're not using 1.1 as version and the time stamp
instead?

2. rpmlint output:

oflb-brett-fonts.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
oflb-brett-fonts.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
oflb-brett-fonts.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
oflb-brett-fonts.spec: W: no-%clean-section
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: invalid-url URL:
http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/brettalton/205 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-%clean-section
oflb-brett-fonts.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/brettalton/205 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: invalid-url URL:
http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/brettalton/205 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
oflb-brett-fonts.src: W: no-%clean-section
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 15 warnings.

Ignorable warnings. 

Please check up the clean section and build root. I also think the version
would be better as 1.1 rather than the time stamp for this font. 

I'll approve it once we have the version clarified. 

Ankur

-- 
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.