[Bug 623871] Review Request: flies-Python-client-client and library for working Flies

[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=623871

Ding-Yi Chen <dchen at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|dchen at redhat.com            |petersen at redhat.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #14 from Ding-Yi Chen <dchen at redhat.com> 2010-08-31 00:21:07 EDT ---
Hi James,
rpmlint does produce following warnings and error:
1. flies-python-client.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/flies-python-client/flies-python-client-0.0.5.tar.gz
HTTP Error 404: Not Found
    This can be fixed easily by uploading the source tarball to
jamesni.fedorapeople.org.
    But guess you will probably use github as your hosting later. 

2. flies-python-client.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2
    We need that for using it with Fedora-12 (and possible with RHEL6),
    so no need to touch it.

3. flies-python-client.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary flies
    You can always add man page later.  Currently having README and command
line help
    is sufficient.

Your package therefore pass the review.
You may asked SCM to have following branches:
Branches: f12 f13 f14 el6
But not el5, because it does not run on el5.
(It builds though).

MUST:
+  rpmlint output is acceptable.
     Note: issues listed in previous paragraph.
+  Package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+  Package meets licensing guidelines, and match the source license.
+  Source files match upstream.
+  specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+  Spec file is written in American English.
+  Spec file is legible.
+  dist tag is present.
+  BuildRoot is proper.
+  BuildRequires are proper.
+  Requires are proper.
+  %install starts with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
+  %clean contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
+  %doc files present.
+ %doc files do not interfere runtime application.
+ Macros are consistently used.
+ Package builds in koji.
+  Package contains code or permissible content.
+  Package installed properly.
+  No system library is bundled.
+  Not relocatable, unless proper justification is presented.
+  %files section must include a %defattr(...) line, and file permissions are
correct.
+  No duplication in %files
+ File names are in valid UTF-8.
+  Own all directory it creates.
+  Files or directories are not owned by other packages.
+  No .la libtool archives exists.

SHOULD:
+  License text are in separate files.
+  Package build in mock.
+  Package can build in all supported architectures.
+  Package runs properly.
+  No direct files dependencies, unless they are in either /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin

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.