[Bug 647510] Review Request: premake - A cross-platform build configuration tool

[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=647510

Dan Horák <dan at danny.cz> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |dan at danny.cz
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #6 from Dan Horák <dan at danny.cz> 2010-11-21 13:05:35 EST ---
formal review is here, see the notes explaining OK* and BAD statuses below:

BAD source files match upstream:
    upstream: 1cd4bded80ecbe695ec309352241a00e6ce01c20  premake-4.2.1-src.zip
    srpm:     a8253af9c17f6e90811b896a2e941492cab4e861  premake-4.2.1-src.zip

OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
BAD license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
BAD latest version is being packaged.
BAD BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
BAD %clean is present.
BAD package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
BAD rpmlint is silent.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
N/A* %check is present and all tests pass.
OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK* file permissions are appropriate.
OK no scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK no headers.
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.

- the freshly downloaded source archive doesn't contain the MacOS/X prebuild
binary
- the resulting license should be GPL+, see point 4 in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_do_I_figure_out_what_version_of_the_GPL.2FLGPL_my_package_is_under.3F
- version 4.3 was released few days ago (includes a switch from GPL to BSD)
- readline-devel must be added as BR
- you shouldn't clean %{_builddir}/%{buildsubdir} -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#.25clean
- rpmlint complains a bit:
premake.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
    => the format of changelog is bad (must include version-release pair, also
add an empty line between entries) -
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Changelogs
premake.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary premake4
    => nice to have, but not a blocker
- a test suite is included in the sources, please check whether it can be run
during the build
- I'd use an explicit "-m 755" when installing the binary, you should also
remove the "%{_builddir}/%{buildsubdir}" part and use "." instead

-- 
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.