[Bug 230512] Review Request: viewvc- Browser interface for CVS and SVN version control repositories

[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: viewvc-  Browser interface for CVS and SVN version control repositories


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230512





------- Additional Comments From bojan at rexursive.com  2007-03-01 15:24 EST -------
> You can remove the sitearch line if your package is a noarch.

Shall do.

> You require both cvs (rcs) and subversion file even though someone could use one
or the other.  Is there a better way to do this?

Yeah, I was also thinking about this. On one hand, if I don't require this and
someone configures one of the two options (CVS or SVN), it may or may not work,
depending on the current state of their system. So, I thought, better err on the
side of caution and make sure at least minimum requirements for both (since
Fedora ships both CVS and SVN) are satisfied, so that things just work. But, if
there is a better way to do this, I'd be happy to change...

> You are also setting up the include file for cvsgraph, but not requiring cvsgraph.

> GNU enscript is already available in Extras.  If you require and configure for
enscript you can have sytax highlighting.

Yeah, not consistent eh? It's easy to put both in as dependencies, I guess. Will
change.

> The INSTALL files says that you need subversion python bindings - it appears
that those are in the main subversion package?

Looks that way on FC6. I'll check devel to see if things have been split up some
more.

> The COMMITTERS file lists the contributors to the project, so it should be
included in %doc.

> Are ./www and ./viewvc.org useful docs?

Yes, to both. Just copied Dag's stuff here, without looking at it much. Will
include.

> will require mod_python (which you do).  This is only one way of running viewvc.
> Is there any particular reason that you've chosen this method?  Is this the
best way?

Well, I was guessing that Python programs run best within mod_python, like Perl
programs do under mod_perl. Not a Python programmer myself, so I have no
proof... I mean, CGI stuff is still there, so if someone wants to reconfigure to
run like that, they still can.

>> #    PythonDebug On
>remove :)

Shall do ;-)

> If you require mod_python, you don't need httpd because it will be found by
dependency of mod_python on httpd.

Shall fix.

> Here are the rpmlint complaints for you package:

I'll look into that.

> Your packages templates should definately live in %{datadir} though.

Yeah, that's how -3 spec file does it.

Thanks for your time! I'll work on improvements and report back when I have them.

-- 
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.