[Bug 238379] Package review: emesene

[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: Package review: emesene
Alias: emesene

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=238379


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|177841                      |
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-01-15 15:33 EST -------
FYI, Monday was the 14th, not the 16th.

I'm removing the NEEDSPONSOR blocker because you already have cvsextras access.

Because you have "%{appdir}" in your files list, it recursively includes
everything below it, which means that everything else you explicitly include
under %{appdir} is a duplicate.  You should use
  %dir %{apprdir}
instead, which includes the directory but doesn't automatically pull in
everything beneath it.

This reveals some other issues:
You list %{podir}/sv twice

You don't include any of the files which live directly under %{appdir}

A COPYING file is installed into %{appdir}.  I guess it's not a big problem but
you already included a copy as %doc.

My recommendation for the %files list:

The %doc and %lang stuff you already have (minus the duplicate sv directory)
%dir %{appdir}
%dir %{podir}
%{appdir}/[A-Za-oq-z]*
%{appdir}/plugins_base
%{_bindir}/emesene
%{menudir}/emesene.desktop
%{icondir}/emesene.png

This gets us down to the following three rpmlint complaints:
  emesene.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/emesene/desktop.py 0644
  emesene.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/emesene/Controller.py 0644
Honestly I don't really have an issue either way, but according to comment 26
you should chmod 0755 Controller.py.

 emesene.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized instant messaging client for Windows 
   Live Messenger (tm) network
An easy fix.

Almost done!

Since I'm now reviewing a completely different package from the one I started
out reviewing, I'll run through my checklist again:
* source files match upstream:
   89cbfc144393d5e7aa6766cd429d70891379234c212f477531c1a67ef17dd803  
   emesene-r806.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
? summary is OK (except for capitalization issue)
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
X rpmlint has valid complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   emesene = 0.99-1.fc9
  =
   /bin/sh
   /usr/bin/env
   gnome-python2-extras
   gtk2
   python

* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  I installed this package and 
   went through the menus and such; everything seemed to work fine, although I 
   have no instant messaging accounts to log into.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
X many duplicates in %files.
X file permissions need a tweak (Controller.py according to upstream).
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* desktop file installed properly and without desktop-file-install complaints.

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