[Bug 473583] Review Request: WordNet - A lexical database for the english language

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Feb 18 21:54:06 UTC 2009


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473583





--- Comment #13 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com>  2009-02-18 16:54:05 EDT ---
Bad:

1. The version in the changelog, should be 3.0-4, not 3.0.4.
2. The sums don't match to upstream:
Upstream SHA1: aeb7887cb4935756cf77deb1ea86973dff0e32fb
Your tarball's SHA1: fb2476bf83cbd14f2030c7c66b7485e49e36671c
3. There is a static lib in the -devel package. Unless we have a good reason,
we don't package static libs:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
4. Devel packages should require the main package (Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release})

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:
wordnet.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.0.4 ['3.0-4.fc11',
'3.0-4']
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (MIT) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
- no .la files

I'd also prefer if you didn't wildcard everything so broadly in %files. That
approach leads to extra files getting packaged upon updates without noticing
it.
Clean up the bad items, and I'll give this another pass.

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list