[Bug 446390] Review Request: cluster - RedHat Cluster Suite

[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: cluster - RedHat Cluster Suite


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446390





------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com  2008-05-14 15:26 EST -------
Since you're replacing existing packages, please be sure to coordinate with
their maintainers and properly End-Of-Life them, according to:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackageEndOfLife

Now, for the review:

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:
cman.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/qdiskd
cman.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/qdiskd
cman.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/scsi_reserve
cman.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/scsi_reserve
cman.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/cman
cman.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/cman
rgmanager.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/rgmanager
rgmanager.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/rgmanager
gfs2-utils.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/gfs2
gfs2-utils.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/gfs2
gfs2-utils.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name gfs2

The incoherent-init-script-name one is safe to ignore, but you should consider
whether all of those services should be enabled by default.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPLv2 and LGPLv2) OK, text in %doc, matches source

You should correct the license tag for the rgmanager subpackage, as it is
GPLv2+. Just add:

License: GPLv2+ into the rgmanager subpackage definition.

- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream (50ca482ccd4d2ee525a982c7cf08ac1100279251)
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
- devel package ok
- no .la files
- post/postun ldconfig ok
- devel requires base package n-v-r 

Aside from the License tag and the initscripts, everything is fine. Show me a
fixed SRPM and I will approve and sponsor. Good work!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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.