[Bug 611285] Review Request: pyvcs - A lightweight abstraction layer over multiple VCSs

[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=611285

Mario Blättermann <mariobl at gnome.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mariobl at gnome.org
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |mariobl at gnome.org
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann <mariobl at gnome.org> 2011-03-27 08:50:07 EDT ---
There is a license difference in your files: The spec file says BSD, the
src.rpm says GPLv2+. According to the project page, the actual license is BSD,
please keep this in mind for your further work on this package.

$ rpmlint -v pyvcs*
pyvcs.spec: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pyvcs/pyvcs-0.2.0.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint -v pyvcs*
pyvcs.src: I: checking
pyvcs.src: I: checking-url http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pyvcs (timeout 10
seconds)
pyvcs.src: I: checking-url
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pyvcs/pyvcs-0.2.0.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


---------------------------------
key:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    - BSD according to the project page

[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
    - Source rpm already contains the actual license

[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
    $ md5sum pyvcs*
    284caf99b824ec4848d642608736edfe  pyvcs-0.2.0.tar.gz
    284caf99b824ec4848d642608736edfe  pyvcs-0.2.0.tar.gz.packaged

[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
    - Koji scratch build was succesful.

[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. 
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream,...
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
    - Koji scratch build available, see above

[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
[+] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.
    - Currently no manpage available.


----------------
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.