[Bug 453684] Review Request: python-nss - Python bindings for NSS

[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-nss - Python bindings for NSS


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453684


dan at danny.cz changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEEDINFO
               Flag|                            |needinfo?(jdennis at redhat.com
                   |                            |)




------- Additional Comments From dan at danny.cz  2008-07-02 02:35 EST -------
review is here, see notes at the end

N/A*	source files match upstream:
OK	package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK*	specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK	dist tag is present.
OK	build root is correct.
OK	license field matches the actual license.
OK*	license is open source-compatible (GPLv2). License text not included upstream.
N/A	latest version is being packaged.
OK	BuildRequires are proper.
OK	compiler flags are appropriate.
OK	%clean is present.
BAD*	package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
N/A	debuginfo package looks complete.
N/A*	rpmlint is silent.
N/A	final provides and requires look sane.
N/A	%check is present and all tests pass.
OK	no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK	owns the directories it creates.
OK	doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK	no duplicates in %files.
OK	file permissions are appropriate.
OK	no scriptlets present.
OK	code, not content.
OK	documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK	%docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK	no headers.
OK	no pkgconfig files.
OK	no libtool .la droppings.
OK	not a GUI app.


* could you start a project on fedorahosted.org?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#We_are_Upstream
* could be adding Provides: python-nspr useful for users?
* you should include license text in the package and install it as %doc
* you must use %python_sitearch instead of %python_sitelib
* rpmlint on binary package is not silent 
    - files %python_sitearch/nss/*.so are 0775, should be 0755
    - examples/ssl_example.py is executable and this leads into dependency on
/usr/bin/python => no executable scripts in %doc

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.