[Bug 643332] Review Request: notmuch - System for indexing, searching, and tagging email

[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=643332

Jan Kaluža <jkaluza at redhat.com> changed:

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

--- Comment #2 from Jan Kaluža <jkaluza at redhat.com> 2010-11-22 06:47:17 EST ---
rpmlint shows only warnings which are not blocker.

Formal review according to Review Guidelines:
Explanation:
[ok] .... the package meets the guideline item
[--] .... the guideline item is not relevant for this package
[ERR] ... the package fails to meet the guideline and must be fixed.
====================

[ok] rpmlint must be run on every package.
[ok] named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ok] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[ok] License must be Fedora approved; Licensing Guidelines.
[ok] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[ok] license file must packaged in %doc.
[ok] spec file in American English.
[ok] spec legible.
[ok] sources must match the upstream source
[ok] must compile and build.
[--] ExcludeArch if it does not.
[ok] complete and sensible BuildRequires
[--] handling of locales
[ok] ldconfig for dynamic libs
[ok] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[--] rules for relocatable packages
[ok] directory ownership
[ok] no duplicate listing in %files
[ok] sane permissions; %defattr(...)
[ok] consistent macro usage
[ok] code or permissable content
[ok] large doc
[ok] header files
[--] static libs
[ok] .so in -devel
[ok] devel requires base package
[--] remove .la files
[--] GUI app must include a %{name}.desktop and use desktop-file-install
[ok] no owning of other packages' files/dirs
[ok] UTF-8 filenames

Formal review according to Packaging Guidelines:

[ok] naming
[ok] version and release
[ok] Licensing
[ok] no inclusion of pre-built binaries or libraries
[ok] spec legibility
[ok] arch support
[ok] filesystem layout
[ok] changelogs
[ok] tags
[ok] BuildRoot
[ok] Requires
[ok] BuildRequires
[ok] summary and description
[ok] encoding
[ok] compiler flags
[ok] debuginfo
[ok] devel packages
[ok] no duplication of system libraries
[ok] no rpath
[ok] config files
[--] initscripts
[--] desktop files
[--] Icon tag in Desktop Files
[ok] macros
[--] handling locale files
[ok] timestamps
[ok] parallel make
[--] scriptlets
[--] conditional deps
[--] relocatable packages
[ok] code vs content
[ok] file and dir ownership
[--] users and groups
[ok] web apps
[ok] no conflicts
[ok] no kernel modules
[ok] nothing in /srv
[ok] no bundling
[ok] no fonts bundling
[--] epoch
[ok] symlinks
[ok] man pages

I think the package is OK, builds find in koji, works well for me.

Consider the package 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.