[Bug 235527] Review Request: python-libacl - POSIX.1e ACLs library wrapper for 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 report.

Summary: Review Request: python-libacl - POSIX.1e ACLs library wrapper for python


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235527





------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2007-04-17 22:44 EST -------

See below - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (GPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
See below - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
5c06b62ca4ee453042c9fa3f28aa56e8  pylibacl-0.2.1.tar.bz2
5c06b62ca4ee453042c9fa3f28aa56e8  pylibacl-0.2.1.tar.bz2.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
See below - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should function as described.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version

Issues:

1. Is the name right here? According to the guidelines if the upstream has 'py'
in it
you can just use that name:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-8756a3bce652c376d7ba3908461b638784b6952d
so perhaps pylibacl would be acceptable instead of python-libacl?

2. Upstream doesn't seem to active, but you might ask if they can include
a copy of the GPL with the package. Not a blocker.

3. The Source URL should probibly be:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/pylibacl/pylibacl-%{version}.tar.bz2

4. Do you need the
%defattr(0644,root,root,0755)
or does a normal
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
Install files with the correct permissions?


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.