[Bug 497756] Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756


Andrew Overholt <overholt at redhat.com> changed:

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




--- Comment #22 from Andrew Overholt <overholt at redhat.com>  2009-07-13 09:42:37 EDT ---
Thanks for untangling this mess, Mat!  The package looks great.  Hopefully we
can port over dependencies to 2.x APIs and get rid of the compat stuff soon. 
As for review points, everything looks good to me:

* naming and versioning good
* licensing okay
* md5sums match of my downloads and the SRPM-included ones
* patches seem okay (would be nice to get upstream to include build.xml but the
OSGi stuff is probably not something they'll take)
* files okay
* rpmlint silent on SRPM and RPMs
* no pre-built binaries included (except the JAR which gets re-generated so
it's okay)
* macros good
* Requires/BuildRequires seem fine
* debuginfo is non-zero so I'll assume it's generated okay :)
* no shared libraries or static libraries
* no rpath usage
* no config files
* doc files and license files good
* no .desktop file
* no lang packs
* nice use of global over define
? should %{?_smp_mflags} be passed to make?
* not relocatable
* file ownership seems fine
* not a web app
* links to upstream bugs and comments -- good

My only concern is the large number of compiler warnings in the C++ generator
stuff.  Do you have any thoughts on these?

I apologize for the incredible delay on my review.  This package is good to go.

-- 
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.