[Bug 698362] Review Request: writetype - Light word processor

[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=698362

Elad Alfassa <el.il at doom.co.il> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |el.il at doom.co.il
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |el.il at doom.co.il
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #6 from Elad Alfassa <el.il at doom.co.il> 2011-06-18 13:38:20 EDT ---
+ Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
+ Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistant macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
+ License
? License field in spec matches
+ License file included in package
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
- Package needs ExcludeArch
? BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
? Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
- Package has a correct %clean section.
+ Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- .la files are removed.

+ Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file

? Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
+ Package has no duplicate files in %files.
- Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
- Package owns all the directories it creates.
+ No rpmlint output.
- final provides and requires are sane:
(include output of for i in *rpm; do echo $i; rpm -qp --provides $i; echo =;
rpm -qp --requires $i; echo; done
manually indented after checking each line.  I also remove the rpmlib junk and
anything provided by glibc.)

SHOULD Items:

? Should build in mock.
- Should build on all supported archs
- Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
- Should have dist tag
- Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)

Issues:

1. The license is GPLv3+ and not GPLv3. (notice the line "or (at your option)
any later version.")
2. Strange premissions on the desktop file. Why?
3. Doesn't build in mock, missing build requirement on desktop-file-utils



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

-- 
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.