[Bug 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language

[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=652835

Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich <krege at land.ru> changed:

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

--- Comment #4 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich <krege at land.ru> 2010-11-15 01:59:39 EST ---
OK, here is.

"+" - OK, "0" - not require.

[+]: rpmlint is almost silent but wrong possitive spelling warning.
[+]: The package must be named according to the  Package Naming Guidelines .
[+]: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. 
[+]: The package must meet the  Packaging Guidelines .
[+]: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the 
Licensing Guidelines .
[+]: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[+]: File, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, included in
%doc.
[+]: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[+]: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
[0]: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+]: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+]: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[0]: 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.
[+]: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[0]: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review.
[+]: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+]: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
[+]: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+]: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[0]: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application.
[0]: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[0]: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[0]: 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.
[0]: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}.
[+]: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
[+]: 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.
[+]: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+]: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

SHOULD Items:
[+] The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[+] The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package
should not segfault instead of running, for example.
[+] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[+] your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.

/===========/
/ 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.