[Bug 235113] Review Request: slf4j - Simple Logging Facade for Java
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Apr 11 09:05:42 UTC 2007
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: slf4j - Simple Logging Facade for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235113
asimon at redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|asimon at redhat.com |nsantos at redhat.com
------- Additional Comments From asimon at redhat.com 2007-04-11 05:05 EST -------
OK * match upstream tarball or project name
OK * try to match previous incarnations in other distributions/packagers for
consistency
---> I agree with your comment
OK * specfile should be %{name}.spec
---> I agree with your comment
OK * OSI-approved
---> I agree with your comment
OK * is it covered by patents?
---> under X11 license
OK * verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches
> do)
---> md5sum matches
OK * correct buildroot should be:
OK * if %{?dist} is used
OK * license text included in package and marked with %doc
OK * packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
---> Could be nice to get rid of those unwanted directories and files:
/.svn/, /test/, /TODO.txt, /src/.svn etc with .svn directories
OK * rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output
OK * specfile is legible
OK * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
OK * BuildRequires are proper
---> 8 warning though
OK * use macros appropriately and consistently
OK * consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps
OK * file permissions should be okay; %defattrs should be present
OK * %clean should be present
OK * verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
OK * run rpmlint on the binary RPMs
OK * package should build on i386
OK * package should build in mock
--
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.
More information about the package-review
mailing list