[Bug 199941] Review Request: gnome-python2-gda

[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: gnome-python2-gda


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199941


kevin at tummy.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |kevin at tummy.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2006-10-01 18:43 EST -------
OK - Package name
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
See below - License
See below - License field in spec matches
See below - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
039e1300368df17de9867685e9705091  gnome-python-extras-2.14.2.tar.bz2
039e1300368df17de9867685e9705091  gnome-python-extras-2.14.2.tar.bz2.1
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. 
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
See below - No rpmlint output.

SHOULD Items:

See below - Should include License or ask upstream to include it.
OK - Should build in mock.

Issues:

1. No %dist tag?

2. Is there any good way to tell what the license is?
The COPYING file (BTW, not a very good name for that file) has a
table of module and license, but doesn't mention gda at all. ;( 
There are also no headers, readme's or anything else in the gda
subdirectory.

3. Your Source line is not correct. It's pointing to the 2.13 dir 
instead of 2.14. 

4. rpmlint says: 

W: gnome-python2-gda devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/pygda-1.2/
pygdavalue_conversions.h
W: gnome-python2-gda devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/pkgconfig/pygda-
1.2.pc

Unfortunately, I don't think the guidelines give much leeway on 
making sure devel files go into a devel subpackage. 
It's not really that much trouble to make a devel subpackage is it?


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.