[Bug 446097] Review Request: pytraffc - Computer version of the board game Rush Hou

Fri Aug 15 05:14:38 UTC 2008

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446097

--- Comment #3 from Geoff Reedy <geoff at programmer-monk.net>  2008-08-15 01:14:36 EDT ---
Some additional items have been brought to my attention, so I'm redoing this
pre-review.

MUST Items:

ok - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.

  4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

ok - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
ok - 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. 
ok - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
ok - MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
?? - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.

The SWIG generated source file contains a BSD licensing clause. I'm not certain
if it is just advising that SWIG is under BSD or declaring that it's output
file is under BSD. This might mean that the proper License tag is GPLv2+ and
BSD.

ok - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
ok - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.

 I suggest changing the puzzle count to 19,000 as that is the American
convention

ok - 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/).
ok - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
 If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source
URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
ok - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
?? - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. 

  koji is down at the moment so I can't attempt build on the other
architectures

- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the [[Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions |exceptions section of
the Packaging Guidelines]] ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.
Apply common sense.
na - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
na - MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun. 
ok - 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. 
ok - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. 

XX - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.

  The base package includes the extra theme files intended to be in the themes
subpackage. The files section for the base package needs to have something
like:

  %dir %{_datadir}/pytraffic
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/*.py
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/*.pyo
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/*.pyc
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/config.db
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/doc
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/libglade
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/music
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/*.egg-info
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/*.desktop
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/sound_test
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/themes
  %{_datadir}/pytraffic/ttraffic.levels

ok - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. 
ok - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section
ok - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros
ok - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
ok - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
ok - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
na - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
na - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
na - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
na - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
na - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release} 
ok - MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives
ok - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed
ok - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
ok - MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
ok - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

SHOULD Items:

na - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
?? - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
ok - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.

  Builds with fedora-8-i386 fedora-9-i386 and fedora-rawhide-i386

?? - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
ok - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
A package should not segfault instead of running, for example.

XX - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is
vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.

  This package installs icons so it should include the gtk-icon-cache
scriptlets on Packaging/ScriptletSnippets

XX - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.

  The dependency in the themes package should be fully versioned

na - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase
ok - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.

The following items need to be addressed:

 * The licensing issue should be clarified. I'm not aware of nor have found any
precedent for this situation. Probably a quick message on fedora-legal can
clear it up.
 * The duplicated files need to be fixed. Use caution when including a
directory in the files list
 * Koji needs to be back up so that the package can be tested for building on
other architectures

Consider doing the following

 * Follow the recommendation in Package/ScriptletSnippets regarding icons
 * Fully version the base package dependency in the themes subpackage

So, IMO we're at NEEDSWORK here

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.