[Bug 656892] Review Request: ghc-augeas - Haskell bindings for the augeas library

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656892

Jens Petersen <petersen at redhat.com> changed:

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

--- Comment #18 from Jens Petersen <petersen at redhat.com> ---
Thanks for the submission.  My only quibble is that currently
the the spec file url and spec file in the srpm have differing
last changelog entries.

Build succeeds in koji f18:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4182838

I am offering to sponsor Jude upon successful completion of this review.

Here is my review:


Here is the review:

 +:ok, NA: not applicable, !: needs attention

MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint output [1]

ghc-augeas.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP
ghc-augeas.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api -> pi, ape, apt
ghc-augeas.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -> HTML, ht ml,
ht-ml
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
ghc-augeas.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP
ghc-augeas.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api -> pi, ape, apt
ghc-augeas.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -> HTML, ht ml,
ht-ml
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
ghc-augeas-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http -> HTTP
ghc-augeas-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api -> pi,
ape, apt
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

[+] MUST: package named according to Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: spec file name must match base package %{name} [2]
[+] MUST: meet Packaging Guidelines
[+] MUST: Fedora approved license and Licensing Guidelines
[!] MUST: License field in the package spec file must match actual license. [3]

Since you allow LGPL 3 or later I think the correct License tag is LGPLv3+

[+] MUST: include license files in %doc if available in source [4]
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English [5] and legible.
[6]
[+] MUST: source md5sum matches upstream release (from upstream URL)

123cb7d684447c03b645e9439f0b70bb  augeas-0.6.1.tar.gz

[+] MUST: successfully compile and build into binary rpms on a primary arch [7]

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4182838

[NA] MUST: if necessary use ExcludeArch for other archs [8]
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[NA] MUST: use %find_lang macro for .po translations [9]
[NA] MUST: packages which store shared library files in the dynamic linker's
default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [11]
[NA] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review [12]
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [13]
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[14]
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [15]
[+] MUST: consistently use macros [16]
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]
[NA] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage. [18]
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. [18]
[NA] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [19]
[+] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [20]
[NA] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package. [19]
[+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency [21]
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec. [20]
[NA] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. [22]
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. [23]
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24]

SHOULD Items:
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [27]
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [29]


So only remaining issue is just correcting the License tag.

Since this is your first package can I ask you to update the
package and I will approve the package and sponsor you.

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