[Bug 444760] Review Request: obm - Open Business Management

[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: obm - Open Business Management


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444760


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tibbs at math.uh.edu




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-06-20 16:48 EST -------
Michael asked me to take a look.  I find it useful to comment on the found
rpmlint complaints as many of them are bogus, but that's not always easy since
rpmlint doesn't really give any indication of how much import you should give to
its spew.  Here's my take:

  obm.src:27: W: unversioned-explicit-provides obm-core
This is bad since you currently provide every possible version of obm-core,
which makes it impossible for anything to depend on a specific obm-core version.
 You must provide a version.

  obm.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 12)
I simply ignore these annoying warnings.  I mean, it's nice if they're cleaned
up, but come on.

  obm.src: W: strange-permission obm-config.sh 0755
rpmlint complains about any executable in the src.rpm; I've never seen this as
being problematic but I'm not sure you can count on files in src.rpm having any
specific permissions.

Note also that a more recent rpmlint gives:
  obm.src:304: E: files-attr-not-set
The %files list for the -services subpackage is missing the %defattr line.

The non-stanrard-uid complaints are OK.

The README.fedora file really shouldn't be executable.

structure_tables.sql should be passed through iconv; there's an extended ASCII
character in the first line and the file doesn't containing any specific
information about how it should be displayed.

What is the point of the obm-rpm.conf file?  If it needs to be there but
shouldn't initially hold anything, can we at least put a comment in there?

What is obm-config?  I'm guessing it's not a pkgconfig file, and if so then the
rpmlint complaint is bogus.

The mysql.sql file should not be executable.

The no-documentation warnings are OK as long as there isn't some bit of relevant
documentation that's been missed.

I personally would use "obm-satellite" and "obm-mysql" as I dislike mixed-case
package names; qt3-MySQL is the only non-Perl/Python module that uses that case,
for example, while 59 packages downcase it including the mysql package itself.

-- 
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.