[Bug 480720] Review Request: gtk2-parasite - A GUI debugging tool for GTK+ applications

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Jan 20 11:10:07 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=480720





--- Comment #1 from Dan Horák <dan at danny.cz>  2009-01-20 06:10:06 EDT ---
formal review is here, see the notes below:

OK source files match upstream:
     checked with diff
BAD package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
BAD license field matches the actual license.
N/A license is open source-compatible.  XXX License text not included upstream.
XXX License text included in package.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
OK rpmlint is silent.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK no scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK no headers.
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.

- package name should reflect upstream name, eg. gtkparasite is appropriate
package name here
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#General_Naming)
- snapshot packages should include date in the release tag
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages)
- license information is completely missing in the sources files and even GPL
is symlinked from autotools, but the license tag says it should MIT as written
only on the web page
- the empty run of configure should be dropped from the autogen.sh

-- 
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