[Bug 233783] Review Request: vegastrike-data - Data files for Vega Strike
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Apr 23 01:36:26 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: vegastrike-data - Data files for Vega Strike
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233783
bugzilla at redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|normal |medium
------- Additional Comments From peter at thecodergeek.com 2007-04-22 21:36 EST -------
Here we go; sorry for the lateness of this review.
== vegastrike-data 0.4.3-1 ==
++ GOOD:
* Naming and version/release are good - especially since it's a large data
package that can be easily copied in the repository instead of rebuilt per
distro. Spec file name is "%{name}.spec" as required.
* Game engine/runtime and data packages are separate, with this data-only
package being noarch.
* License (GPL) is acceptable; and a copy of it is included in the installed
documentation (%doc vega-license.txt).
* Ownership and permissions of files/directories are sane with no duplicates in
the %files listing; and the %defattr line is good.
* %changelog section is good.
* BuildRoot is properly defined, and cleaned both as the first step in %install
and as the only step in %clean.
* Dependency list (only the base vegastrike package) is OK.
* Successfully builds into binary (noarch) RPMs on both Development and FC-6
(x86_64).
* Non-ASCII files are encoded in UTF-8, as required.
* Included documentation is good.
* Macro and $RPM_* variable usage is consistent.
* Package is not relocatable and contains no translations (so %find_lang stuff
is not necessary).
* Package source matches that of upstream. (The md5sum doesn't match; but a
recursive diff between the source checkout as noted in the spec and the unpacked
tarball included in your source RPM returns nothing different between the two.)
* Files marked as %doc are not required at runtime.
++ BAD:
(1) rpmlint complains about several empty files in the source and binary RPMs:
I: vegastrike-data checking
E: vegastrike-data zero-length /usr/share/vegastrike/units/weapons/weapons.blank
E: vegastrike-data zero-length
/usr/share/vegastrike/units/factions/factions.template
E: vegastrike-data zero-length /usr/share/vegastrike/units/weapons/weapons.template
E: vegastrike-data zero-length /usr/share/vegastrike/units/subunits/subunits.blank
E: vegastrike-data zero-length
/usr/share/vegastrike/units/subunits/subunits.template
E: vegastrike-data zero-length /usr/share/vegastrike/units/factions/factions.blank
These seem ignorable at first glance though - could you verify this please?
(2) As-is, it seems to include its own locally-modified copy of various Python
modules (modules/builtin/). A brief perusal of the diff between the included
python modules and the system copies of them shows mostly variable renaming and
similar generally-insignificant changes.
(3) This contains a lot of ISO-8859 text files, as follows. These should be
encoded in UTF-8.
./textures/sol2/sources.txt: ISO-8859 text
./accounts/test2.save: ISO-8859 text, with very long lines
./accounts/test1.save: ISO-8859 text, with very long lines
./accounts/default.save: ISO-8859 text, with very long lines
./universe/fgnames/purist.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/forsaken.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/LIHW.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/confed.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/highborn.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/shaper.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/cities.txt: ISO-8859 English text
./universe/fgnames/unadorned.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/homeland-security.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/ISO.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/merchant.txt: ISO-8859 text
./universe/fgnames/andolian.txt: ISO-8859 text
(4) The splash_holovid and splash_pacifier animations contain objectionable
images (scantily-clad women in rather lude poses). These should probably be
removed or replaced with more appropriate content.
(5) You make executable every Python file in this which has a shebang. Is this
really needed or can the shebang lines be removed instead? (The rest of the
scriplets are otherwise sane.)
--
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