[Bug 177825] Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: torsmo - TyopoytaORvelo System MOnitor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177825


chabotc at xs4all.nl changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778                      |163779
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl  2006-01-17 16:58 EST -------
Better late then never right? :-)

Changelog format currently is:
* Tue Jan 17 2006 Andreas Bierfert <andreas.bierfert[AT]lowlatency.de>         
                         
0.18-3
But should be:
* Tue Jan 17 2006 Andreas Bierfert <andreas.bierfert[AT]lowlatency.de>         
                          - 0.18-3

Which makes rpmlint complain:
W: torsmo no-version-in-last-changelog

sample torsmo.rc is now included, i'm sure this will help users a lot :-) Might
be worth adding a quick note in the description to check out the torsmorc.sample
file in the doc dir? (just so they know how to find it, very much optional, just
an idea)

Whole torsmo project is missing an icon, so i guess its ok to leave it out :-)

Formal review list:
MUST review items:
- Builds cleanly on FC5 devel.
- rpmlint's only output is a version/changelog warning (see above)
- Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum)
- Package name meets guidelines
- spec file name is in %{name}.spec format
- Licence (BSD) is fedora extra's compatible & is included in spec
- Spec file is in (american) english
- Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines
- All build dependencies are listed
- No ldconfig needed
- All files have proper permissions
- Package is not relocatable
- No duplicate files in %files section
- No missing files in %files section
- Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
- Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines
- No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation
- No -devel package needed
- No directory-ownerships needed
- Has propper desktop file / -installation and desktop-file-utils BR

Should items:
- Includes upstream licence file (COPYING)
- No insane scriplets
- No unnescesarry requires
- Mock builds cleanly on fc-devel-i386

FE-APPROVED but please do fix the changelog entries before commiting the srpm to
cvs :-)


-- 
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.