New Package: kyum

[Tom 'spot' Callaway]

On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 19:54 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:

> No problem if we would just get the terminology right, please. ;) Packages
> are not sponsored, but _reviewed_ and _approved_ by another contributor.
> On the contrary, people and their CVS accounts are sponsored.  Conclusively,
> Jochen is in search for somebody to review and approve kyum. He has CVS
> access already.

Review of kyum:

Rpmlint checks:

kyum-0.6.3-1.src.rpm
E: kyum no-signature
W: kyum strange-permission kyum-0.6.3.tar.gz 0400

kyum-0.6.3-1.i386.rpm
W: kyum non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/kyum_sysinfo.py 0644
E: kyum no-signature

You might want to make /usr/bin/kyum_sysinfo.py executable if its
sitting in /usr/bin, although it does not seem fatal to kyum
functionality. All other errors are safe to ignore.

Generic checks:

Good:
- source matches upstream
- License is OK (GPL)
- Meets package naming guidelines
- Meets PackagingGuidelines (except for two exceptions in bad) 

Bad:
- source is messy. It unpacks into kyum/ and kyum-0.6.3/, of which, only
the latter is actually used. The upstream source should be fixed to
remove the kyum directory (all the files in that dir are duplicated in
kyum-0.6.3). This will also get the SRPM file size down a bit.
- GPL requires that COPYING be included in binary distribution, refer
to: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyMustIInclude . Easy
enough to add %doc COPYING to the %files.

Resolve the bad items and the rpmlint error I highlighted, and I will
approve kyum.

~spot
-- 
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!