[Bug 580755] Review Request: yad - Display graphical dialogs from shell scripts or command line

Fri Apr 9 22:24:59 UTC 2010

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=580755

--- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert at fedoraproject.org> 2010-04-09 18:24:57 EDT ---
FIX - MUST: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/yad-*
yad.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dialogs -> dialog, dialog s, dialings
yad.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dialogs -> dialog, dialog s,
dialings
yad.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 12)
yad.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://yad.googlecode.com/files/yad-0.2.0.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
yad.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dialogs -> dialog, dialog s,
dialings
yad.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dialogs -> dialog, dialog
s, dialings
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

The spelling errors can be ignored, "dialogs" is the correct pluram form in
American English.
The source URL is valid, tested with spectool
This leaves the mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs warning, which is trivial but
should IMO be fixed.

OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package %{name}
OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines
?? - MUST: License field in spec file matches the actual license
OK - MUST: license file included in %doc
OK - MUST: spec is in American English
OK - MUST: spec is legible
OK - MUST: sources match the upstream source by MD5
51cbf09fb8e6d92f0fca6c4ac1d5b890
OK - MUST: successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64
N/A - 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.
OK - MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
OK - MUST: handles locales properly with %find_lang
N/A - 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.
OK - MUST: Package does not bundle copies of system libraries.
N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review.
OK - MUST: owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...)
OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: consistently uses macros
OK - MUST: package contains code, or permissable content
N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig'.
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library
files that end in .so must go in a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully
versioned dependency
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application but it is not supposed to be
calles from the menu, so no %{name}.desktop file is required.
OK - MUST: package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - MUST: at the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: all filenames valid UTF-8

SHOULD Items:
OK - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
OK - SHOULD: functions as described.
N/A - SHOULD: Scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
N/A - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg
N/A - SHOULD: no file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin

Other items:
OK - latest stable version
OK - SourceURL valid
OK - Compiler flags ok
OK - Debuginfo complete

Issues:
- What license is this? COPYING is GPLv3, but about.c says it's GPLv2+
- The manpage should not have .gz as extension because we might switch to bz2
or lzma compressed manpages some day
- Please fix the mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs warning.

The only blocker is the license. If you clarify this with upstream, I will
approve the package.

-- 
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.