[Bug 460057] Review Request: openlayers - A JavaScript library for displaying map data

Tue Oct 14 19:53:28 UTC 2008

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460057

--- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchy <msuchy at redhat.com>  2008-10-14 15:53:24 EDT ---
OK - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
OK - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
OK - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming
Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is
unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora
is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest
(http://www.ioccc.org/).
OK (md5sum c0d288a7b935e8b940b0b850ef135c95)- MUST: The sources used to build
the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified
for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with
this.
FAIL - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one supported architecture.
FAIL - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next
to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla
entries during the review process, so they should put this description in the
comment until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and
replace the long explanation with the bug number. The bug should be marked as
blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86 , FE-ExcludeArch-x64 , FE-ExcludeArch-ppc ,
FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64
OK - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.
OK - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
OK - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the
macros section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity)
OK - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present.
OK - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ). See Prepping BuildRoot For %install for
details.
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
FAIL - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See
MockTricks for details on how to do this.
FAIL - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
A package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
OK - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is
vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
OK - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
OK - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself. Please see File Dependencies in the Guidelines for
further information. 

Your package do not build in Koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=880737
Beside this everything else looks good.

-- 
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.