[Bug 529016] Review Request: yaml-cpp - A YAML parser and emitter for C++

[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=529016


Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking at uos.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |martin.gieseking at uos.de
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |martin.gieseking at uos.de
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking at uos.de>  2009-10-16 13:20:31 EDT ---
Guido, the package is pretty clean. You should just remove the duplicate
license.txt from devel. It's sufficient to add it to the base package.

$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-11-x86_64/result/yaml-cpp-*
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


---------------------------------
keys used in following checklist:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.

[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.

[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.

[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    - MIT (modern style with sublicense) according to license.txt

[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.

[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.

[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.

[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.

[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
    $ sha1sum yaml-cpp-0.2.2.tar.gz*
    b239e50fed91a11ada843646622df84c69fea297  yaml-cpp-0.2.2.tar.gz
    b239e50fed91a11ada843646622df84c69fea297  yaml-cpp-0.2.2.tar.gz.1


[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
    koji scratch build:
    http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1750413

[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work ...

[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.

[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
    - no locales

[+] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.

[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
    - not relocatable

[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. 

[X] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
    - remove license.txt from %doc of devel package

[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.

[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.

[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.

[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.

[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
    - no large docs

[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.

[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.

[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
    - no static libs built 

[+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'

[+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.

[+] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
    .la files removed

[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need
a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
    - no GUI

[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.

[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}.

[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.


[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
    - builds in mock

[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
    - builds in koji

[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
    - seems to work as expected

[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.

[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.

[+] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.

-- 
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.