[Bug 444257] Review Request: nted - Musical score 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: nted - Musical score editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444257


rhbugs at n-dimensional.de changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEEDINFO                    |ASSIGNED
               Flag|needinfo?(rhbugs at n-         |
                   |dimensional.de)             |




------- Additional Comments From rhbugs at n-dimensional.de  2008-06-08 10:17 EST -------
Review Guidelines MUST items:
OK: rpmlint produces no output
OK: naming guidelines
OK: %{name}.spec
OK: Packaging Guidelines
OK: Licensing Guidelines
      All the source files seem to be GPLv2+.
      Help->About dialog is GPLv2+.
      HTML manuals are GFDLv1.2+
      COPYING is GPLv3.
    Ergo: Multiple licenses, but conforms to Fedora Licensing Guidelines.
FAIL: License field match
      Does not cover HTML manuals. Use "License: GPLv2+ and GFDL"?
FAIL: %doc COPYING
    "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."
    OK... as the shipped COPYING file is GPLv3+, which none of the files in
    the source package is licensed under, the source package does NOT include
    the text of the licenses in its own file. So we just can NOT %doc COPYING
    to technically satisfy the guidelines.

    Probably upstream has just shipped the default COPYING file autoreconf
    automatically adds to the source tree. We should to confirm this with
    upstream.
OK: spec file in en_US
OK: legible spec file
OK: Sources match upstream
OK: Compiles and builds on i386, x86_64, ppc, ppc64:
    http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=594520
N/A: Builds on all arches
OK: All build deps listed
OK: Uses %find_lang
N/A: no shared libs
N/A: not relocatable
OK: owns all created dirs
OK: no duplicate files in %files
OK: proper file permissions
OK: %clean with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
OK: consistent use of macros
OK: packagecontains code
OK: Those two HTML manuals are not necessarily "large docs" for a -doc pkg.
    Oh, and they are needed as online help at runtime.
OK: %doc files must not affect runtime...
    The "Help->Documentation" menu item just shows an untitled dialog window
    +---------------------------------------------+
    | Excuse!  The documentation is not available |
    | due to an installation error                |
    |                                      [ OK ] |
    +---------------------------------------------+
    Apart from this, nted works like a charm with or without docs.
N/A: No header files
N/A: no static libs
N/A: no foo.pc file
N/A: no libfoo.so.1.1
N/A: devel package
N/A: no .la files
OK: desktop file
    OK, but German translations to go with the German manual would be nice.
OK: Does not own other apps' files or dirs
OK: %install starts with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
OK: All filenames are valid ASCII and thus UTF-8

Review Guidelines SHOULD items:
FAIL: No COPYING for GPLv2
OK: Are Summary(de) and %description(de) available? Yes, now.
OK: Builds in local mock
OK: Builds in Fedora koji on i386, x86_64, ppc, ppc64
OK: Appears to function as described.
N/A: No scriptlets
N/A: no subpackages
N/A: no foo.pc
N/A: no file deps

Packaging Guidelines:
OK: Uses standard compiler flags now.
OK: All docs in /usr/share/doc/%{name}-%{version} now.

SUMMARY:

FAIL      License: ignores HTML manual license
FAIL      We need to NOT "%doc COPYING". Just ignore the COPYING file.
SHOULDFIX Docs: Are installed to a place where nted cannot find it.
          I have a patch.
OPTIONAL  Add lang(de) versions for Summary: and Description:
OPTIONAL  Assist upstream with cleaning up nted's configure.in
OPTIONAL  The code is still full of ugly compiler warnings.
          I'd say upstream should fix that, possibly with some help.

See http://ndim.fedorapeople.org/packages/nted/0.22.3-2.4.fc9/ for
my suggested fixes for the first four three of these.

When you have a fix for the first three, I'll approve the package,
unless you want to update to the nted-0.24.1 release before review
completion.


-- 
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.