[Bug 228969] Review Request: wxGlade - A wxWidgets/wxPython/wxPerl GUI designer

[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: wxGlade - A wxWidgets/wxPython/wxPerl GUI designer


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228969


bbbush.yuan at gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora_requires_release_note|
                   |-                           |




------- Additional Comments From bbbush.yuan at gmail.com  2007-02-25 01:57 EST -------
== Not an official review as I'm not yet sponsored ==

The blockers are listed below

      - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming
Guidelines.

spec name should conform to package name: wxGlade

      - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.

The website says:
Starting from version 0.4, wxGlade requires wxPython >= 2.6 and Python >= 2.2.

should not Requires(pre) or Requires(post) desktop-file-utils, but should
BuildRequires it.

BuildRoot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

%description has a blank comment?

install icons to hicolors directory instead of pixmaps, and adjust your desktop
file (Icon=wxGlade without file extension). This will make it better suit
desktop theme changes. Remember to update icon cache if you do this.

change your desktop file to remove "Application" category, leaving only
"Development"

      - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is
unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora
is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest
(http://www.ioccc.org/).

better remove the sed script, to source/patch file. Is there any guidelines for
desktop files versioning? I mean, both the file name and the file content should
contain a version number, then there would be a lot of maintaince work. But if
using sed, the code will be less clear.

      - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one supported architecture.

builds fine here on i386

      - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines; inclusion
of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.

BuildRequires desktop-file-utils

      - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.

please do this.

      - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be
set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include
a %defattr(...) line.

%defattr(-,root,root,-)

      - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the
macros section of Packaging Guidelines.

I don't know if re-define %name and %version and %release is a good idea.


Why python source and compiled files are placed in /usr/share/ directory? I
think they should be in /usr/lib/python2.x/site-packages.

I have not install this package yet.

-- 
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.