[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Jul 13 20:42:47 UTC 2008


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: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949





------- Additional Comments From fedora at christoph-wickert.de  2008-07-13 16:42 EST -------
Review for 145e2eb18b87a2dc7a12ce237c9c75c1  beldi-0.9.16-2.src.rpm:

OK - MUST: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/beldi-*
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the  Package Naming Guidelines
Ok - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
OK - MUST: The package meets the  Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
 Licensing Guidelines

FAIL - MUST: The License field in the package spec file does not match the
actual license: Code is GPLv3+, but License tag is GPLv2+
FAIL - MUST: License text from source is included in %doc, but the License is
out of date (GPLv2)

OK - MUST: The spec file is written in American English
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
md5 420555ec522884dcb771c98c0960a1f5
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on i386

FAIL - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but
gtkglextmm-devel is only needed when building with --enable-opengl. The OpenGL
interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. What
do you think?
Pigment support (requires pigment-devel >= 0.3 and gstreamer-plugins-base-devel)
is still experimental and does not build here, so I suggest not to enable it.

OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content
OK - MUST: Files included in %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a %{name}.desktop
file that file is properly installed with desktop-file-install
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages
OK - MUST: The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install
OK - MUST: All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8

FIX - SHOULD: Please bug upstream to include an updated copy of the license text.
FIX? - SHOULD: Could you include a German translation of description and summary?
FIX - SHOULD: Typo in description: less -> least, consist -> consists.
IMHO the description could be simplified a little:
----->
BeLDi, the Belug (Linux) Distribution Burner, is a program designed to burn
distributions. It is designed to require the least administration and knowledge
as possible.

BeLDi has a intuitive graphic user interface where the main screen shows the
available distributions in a list. If the user selects one, he will be asked
which version and architecture he wants to burn. Once the burn procedure starts
a bar shows its progress. All user operations can be completed with the mouse or
a touchscreen.
<-----

OK - SHOULD: The package builds in mock
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described
OK - SHOULD: Latest version of the application


So the only blocker is OpenGL. The license text is no real issue for me as long
as you fix the license tag in the spec.

NEEDSWORK

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list