[Bug 488197] Review Request: ibus-rawcode - The Rawcode engine for IBus

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Mar 3 08:46:45 UTC 2009


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=488197


Parag AN(पराग) <panemade at gmail.com> changed:

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




--- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade at gmail.com>  2009-03-03 03:46:43 EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock.
 Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1216185
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream.
26e7aeb1e54ebbab4de222f67ffe174f  ibus-rawcode-1.0.0.20090303.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc files present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ defattr usage is correct.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code.
+ no static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage exists.
+ no .la files.
+ translations are available.
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ no scriptlets are used.
+ Package ibus-rawcode-1.0.0.20090303-2.fc11-i586 =>
  Requires: Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libdbus-1.so.3
libglib-2.0.so.0 libgobject-2.0.so.0 libibus.so.0 rtld(GNU_HASH)
  Provides: ibus-rawcode = 1.0.0.20090303-2.fc11

APPROVED.

-- 
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.




More information about the package-review mailing list