[Bug 219930] Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel

[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: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219930


fedora at christoph-wickert.de changed:

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




------- Additional Comments From fedora at christoph-wickert.de  2007-01-06 12:41 EST -------
REVIEW for 
80f9ae6864029fd3b0635e71f486c538  lxpanel-0.2.4-3.src.rpm

OK - rpmlint -i lxpanel-0.2.4-3.src.rpm 
W: lxpanel non-coherent-filename lxpanel-0.2.4-3.src.rpm
The file which contains the package should be named
<NAME>-<VERSION>-<RELEASE>.<ARCH>.rpm.

This is odd, I don't see no error here. Something ether is wrong with rpmlint or
with your build environment. I don't see this error when I rebuild the srpm
locally or in mock, so I choose to ignore it in this review, but can you send me
your .rpmmarcos file so we can investigate this further? Does the error go away,
when you rebuild the package once again locally?

OK - package and spec named according to the package naming guidelines
OK - package meets packaging guidelines
OK - license is open-source compatible, but COPYING looks dual licensed for me.
First part is a BSD like license, second GPLv2.
OK - Since GPL is more restrictive than BSD the whole package becomes GPL. So
the license field in the spec is ok.
OK - COPYING included in source and correctly installed in %doc
OK - spec is in American English
OK - spec is legible

MINOR NOTE - line warps in long fields like %description are usually done after
79 characters.

OK - source in srpm matches upstream by md5
37d0e9f2993fc63d9e7e1684552e10b4
        OK - package compiles and build into binaries on core 6 i386
OK - no known ExcludeArchs
OK - BuildRequires sane
OK - locales handled correctly
OK - no shared libs to worry about
OK - package is not relocatable
OK - package owns all directories it creates

MINOR NOTE - Instead of 
%dir %{_datadir}/lxpanel/
        %{_datadir}/lxpanel/*
        %dir %{_libdir}/lxpanel/
        %{_libdir}/lxpanel/*
        you could simply use
%{_datadir}/lxpanel/
        %{_libdir}/lxpanel/
        since you include everything in these directories anyway. The slashes at
the end of the line is only for humans to indicate its a dir.

OK - no duplicates in %files
OK - file permissions and %defattr correct
OK - valid clean section
OK - macro usage consistent
OK - code, not content
OK - no large docs
OK - docs don't affect runtime
OK - no header files, static libs or *.pc files
OK - no libtool archives
OK - IMO no desktop file is needed since it's panel and not what I call a
typical program/standalone application. 
OK - package doesn't own directories already owned by other files
OK - package builds in mock (devel)
OK - lxpanel works fine, but lxpanelctl is buggy. I can't add more starter
because the "Select Application"-Dialog doesn't list the files in
/usr/share/applications. Also hitting return in the location bar doesn't work.
Looking at src/plugins/launchbar.c I think this is a known issue (see the FIXME
in line 490) and isn't really meant to work atm.

So from a reviewers point of view everything looks fine except rpmlint. If the
rpmlint error on the srpm can be fixed with a simple rebuild build you can
consider this package to be APPROVED.

-- 
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.