[Bug 450223] Review Request: mediawiki-SpecialInterwiki - An extension to provide an interwiki management system

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Jun 6 01:57:55 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: mediawiki-SpecialInterwiki -  An extension to provide an interwiki management system


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450223


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

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




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-06-05 21:57 EST -------
A three-file package; not much to it.

All I can say is that %prep can go entirely, and the Source files should be
commented with the URLs.  (I know you can't provide the URLs directly on the
Source: lines due to URL parameters needing to be passed.)  Trivial issues; fix
them up when you import.

* source files match upstream (checked by manually downloading from upstream
   website)
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* BuildRequires are proper (none; nothing to build)
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   mediawiki-SpecialInterwiki = 0-0.2.20080606svn.fc10
  =
   mediawiki < 1.11
* %check is present; no test suite upstream.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

APPROVED

-- 
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