[Bug 248815] Review Request: trac-bazaar-plugin - Support for Bazaar source repositories in trac

[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: trac-bazaar-plugin - Support for Bazaar source repositories in trac


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248815


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-07-28 00:06 EST -------
I guess this looks just like the other two trac SCM plugins already in the distro.

You can probably remove the initial comment from the spec.

The only thing I can complain about is inconsistent macroization (%{__python}
but not %{__rm}).  I vaguely remember something special about python that
exempted it from the usual "consistent use of macros" rule, but I can't recall
the details.  In any case, I trust you to fix things up as appropriate.

* source files match upstream.  Verified manually by generating the tarball 
  according to the instructions in the spec and comparing the contents.
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   trac-bazaar-plugin = 0.2-1.20070717bzr180.fc8
  =
   bzr
   python(abi) = 2.5
   python-setuptools
   trac
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  I haven't the means to test 
   this package.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.