[Bug 481224] Review Request: rabbitmq-server - An AMQP server written in Erlang

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481224





--- Comment #20 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com>  2009-05-06 01:15:21 EDT ---
Just found another one easy-to-fix issue - no need to ship INSTALL file in
%doc. It's useless. Please remove it.

REVIEW:

- rpmlint is not silent - see above. Easy to fix, anyway.
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines .
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+/- The spec file for the package MUST be legible (except the silly trick with
rabbitmq-script-wrapper - I advice you to add some explanations in spec-file,
however it's not a blocker).

- The sources, used to build the package, MUST match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.

[petro at Sulaco SOURCES]$ md5sum rabbitmq-server-1.5.4.tar.gz*
dab74bc1a3051cfc94a11abeabb8b0c6  rabbitmq-server-1.5.4.tar.gz
9d43f979d533df743ca7f6050f142040  rabbitmq-server-1.5.4.tar.gz.1
[petro at Sulaco SOURCES]$

This is a blocker. Please fix it.

+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji buildlog in the comments above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ A package owns all directories that it creates.
+ No files, listed more than once in the spec file's %files listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
+ No large documentation files.
+ Everything, a package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.

- Header files must be in a -devel package. Consider creating devel-subpackage
for %{_rabbit_erllibdir}/include. Please, note, that in the vast majority of
cases, devel packages must require the base package (using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}). 

+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.

Ok, let's summarize things. Required to fix:

* Add proper source-file to srpm (md5 must match)
* Move headers into devel sub-package
* Fix rpmlint warning about missing-lsb-keyword
* Exclude INSTALL file from %doc.

Should fix (not a blocker - just to your consideration)

* Add comments, explaining usage of rabbitmq-script-wrapper.
* Discover the issue with build failure on EPEL (I'm sure of importance EPEL
branch of rabbitmq-server).

These are the last obstacles on our road :)

-- 
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.