[Bug 168635] Review Request: colorscheme: generate a variety of colorschemes from a single starting color
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Sep 20 04:36:41 UTC 2005
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: colorscheme: generate a variety of colorschemes from a single starting color
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168635
toshio at tiki-lounge.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From toshio at tiki-lounge.com 2005-09-20 00:36 EST -------
APPROVED
But see Notes.
b017737456db88209a405e26b81b6f64 colorscheme.spec
49ee1ae0b442054e1857a27d90591f6e colorscheme-0.2.1-1.src.rpm
Good:
* Package name follows namng guidelines.
* spec is named after the package name.
* License is GPL, matches the spec name, and is included in the package.
* Spec file is legible
* Builds on x86_64.
* No ExcludeArchs yet.
* No excluded BuildRequires.
* Builds in mock
* Matches upstream source
* Owns all directories
* No duplicate files
* Permissions set correctly
* Has %clean section
* Makes good use of macros
* Code not content
* Properly contains a .desktop file.
Minor:
* rpmlint gives:
W: colorscheme wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/colorscheme-0.2.1/TODO
This could be fixed with dos2unix, ignored, or the TODO file could be left
out of the distribution. It isn't terribly useful.
Notes:
* colorscheme has its own unittests. These are enabled by buildrequiring
cppunit-devel and running make check in the %check section. I tried to
run the tests on the current package and found that quite a few of them
failed. If this isn't known, you might want to run the tests and submit
a bug upstream.
* I don't believe there's a lot of value in including the .sig. A reviewer
still has to go to the project website to verify the origin of the .sig and
(most of the time) that the key seems to belong to the upstream author.
The .sig should be checked by the reviewer but not included in the finished
package. If you have/know of another view, feel free to share.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list