[Bug 445151] Review Request: merkaartor - openstreetmap editor

[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: merkaartor - openstreetmap editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445151


limb at jcomserv.net changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From limb at jcomserv.net  2008-07-24 16:17 EST -------
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.

Multiple errors like the following:
merkaartor-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/merkaartor/Interaction/CreateAreaInteraction.cpp
The file is installed with executable permissions, but was identified as one
that probably should not be executable.  Verify if the executable bits are
desired, and remove if not.

Check the permissions on the source code in the tarball.  If they're executable,
correct this in the spec to silence this warning.

- MUST: The package must be named according to the  Package Naming Guidelines .
Good.

- 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 .
Good.

- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
Good.

- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
Good.

- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
Change license tag to GPLv2+

- 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.
Good.

- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
Good.

- 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/).
Good.

- 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.
md5 matches.

- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
Builds great here.

- 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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next to
the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla entries
during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment
until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the
long explanation with the bug number. The bug should be marked as blocking one
(or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86 , FE-ExcludeArch-x64 , FE-ExcludeArch-ppc , FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64 
N/A

More to come. . .

-- 
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.