[Bug 505017] Review Request: eclipse-veditor - Eclipse-based Verilog/VHDL plugin

[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=505017





--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako at redhat.com>  2009-06-17 10:47:27 EDT ---
Formal review:
[OK] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. No warnings/errors.
[OK] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines 
[OK] MUST: The spec file name match the base package %{name}        
[OK] MUST: The package must meet the   Packaging Guidelines
[OK] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the   Licensing Guidelines .                                  
[OK] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.                                                          
[OK] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[OK] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[FAIL] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Source0 URL is not existing.           
[OK] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.                                
[OK] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.                     
[OK] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. 
[OK] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[OK] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[OK] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[OK] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[OK] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[OK] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. 
[OK] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. 
[OK] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[OK] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[TODO] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.

The only fix needed is to fix Source0 URL.
And it would be good to ask upstream to include license file, but it's not
blocking this review.

-- 
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.