[Bug 784847] Review Request: aplpy - The Astronomical Plotting Library in Python

[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=784847

Golo Fuchert <packages at golotop.de> changed:

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

--- Comment #7 from Golo Fuchert <packages at golotop.de> 2012-02-05 15:36:19 EST ---
Hi Germán,

first of all, the bugzilla ticket needs to have the same name as the package
itself before the SCM request, so you have to rename it to APLpy as well.

But now the review:

rpmlint SRPMS/APLpy-0.9.6-2.fc16.src.rpm
RPMS/noarch/APLpy-0.9.6-2.fc16.noarch.rpm SPECS/APLpy.spec 
APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US grayscale -> gray scale,
gray-scale, graceless
APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorscale -> color scale,
color-scale, colorless
APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable ->
customization
APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorbars -> color bars,
color-bars, colors
APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalebars -> scale bars,
scale-bars, scalars
APLpy.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-matplotlib
APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US grayscale -> gray scale,
gray-scale, graceless
APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorscale -> color
scale, color-scale, colorless
APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable ->
customization
APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorbars -> color bars,
color-bars, colors
APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalebars -> scale bars,
scale-bars, scalars
APLpy.noarch: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/APLpy-0.9.6/INSTALL
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings.

All the warnings can be ignored, however the Packaging Guidelines recommend
_not_ to contain INSTALL files. Concerning the error: This is a false positive.
If you want to, you can report this as a bug (for rpmlint I guess). There is a
filter for such packages.

[+] = ok
[o] = does not apply
[-] = not ok

MUST:

[+] The package is named according to the guidelines
[+] Spec file name matches base package name
[+] The package follows the Packaging Guidelines
[+] The license is an approved licence (MIT)
[+] The License field matches the actual licence
[+] License file from source file is included in %doc
[+] The spec file is written in American English
[+] The spec file is legible
[+] Used sources match with upstream sources (md5)

$ md5sum APLpy-0.9.6.tar.gz.*
bfd8e61ea1139dcc3d8bdf94eee03df3  APLpy-0.9.6.tar.gz.packaged
bfd8e61ea1139dcc3d8bdf94eee03df3  APLpy-0.9.6.tar.gz.upstream

[+] Package build at least on one primary architecture (i686)
[o] No architectures known, where the package doesn't build
[+] All build dependencies are listed in the BuildRequires section
[o] No locales for the package
[o] Package stores no shared libraries
[o] Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
[o] Package is not relocatable
[+] Package owns all directories it installs
[+] No files are listed more then once in the %files section
[+] File permissions are set properly (%defattr(...) is used)
[+] Consistent use of macros
[+] Package contains code and documentation only, no content
[+] No large documentation files
[+] %doc files do not affect runtime
[o] No Header files included
[o] No static libraries
[o] No library files ending with .so included
[o] No -devel subpackage
[+] No libtool .la archives included
[o] No GUI application, no need for a .desktop file
[+] Package does not own files or directories that are owned by other packages
[+] All filenames are valid UTF-8

SHOULD:

[+] The package builds in mock

python specific:
[+] Python egg is being built from source
[o] No compat package.

-----

Comments:

- You have to change the name of this ticket
- I would recommend not to include INSTALL in the package
- You may want to report a bug concerning the rpmlint error
- The spec file contains some tags or commands which are no
  longer needed if you package for Fedora only. Those that I noticed where:
   BuildRoot
 %defattr(-,root,root,-)
 %clean
  Please consider removing them. If you intend to package for RHEL, some
  might still be needed, though.

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