https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182761
Golo Fuchert <packa...@golotop.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Golo Fuchert <packa...@golotop.de> ---
Martin, the package is already in a very good shape. There is only one thing
that has to be changed before including it in the repos:
Surely you are aware of the latest changes to the Packaging Guidelines that the
license files should not be included as %doc any longer, but as %license (see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text).
Please change that before pushing the package to the repos.
Additionally, but that is only a matter of taste, I am not so happy with the
frequent explicit mentioning of the package name in the spec file due to the
mismatch of the package name and the source name. Maybe you want to consider
introducing additional macro names.
Here is the official review now:
[+] No errors reported by rpmlint:
rpmlint vdr-weatherforecast-0.0.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
vdr-weatherforecast.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi,
Io, ii
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint vdr-weatherforecast-0.0.2-1.fc21.src.rpm
vdr-weatherforecast.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi, Io,
ii
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[+] package name follows the naming guidelines.
[+] spec file name matches the base package %{name}.
[+] package meets the packaging guidelines.
[+] package is licensced with a Fedora approved license (GPLv2+)
[+] Licencse field is correct.
[!] the package contains a license file, but this is not included using
%license
[+] spec file is written in American English.
[+] spec file is legible
[+] Packaged sources agree with upstream sources.
b7afd15376303c1ad7940d09cdf81b8a7642e145bf913e35609f9e5be1bb7f2c
vdr-plugin-weatherforecast-0.0.2.tar.bz2-upstream
b7afd15376303c1ad7940d09cdf81b8a7642e145bf913e35609f9e5be1bb7f2c
vdr-plugin-weatherforecast-0.0.2.tar.bz2-packaged
[+] successfully compiles and builds on at least one primary architecture
(tested using mock)
[+] no need for an ExcludeArch (ARM not tested)
[+] all build dependencies listed in the BuildRequires
[+] locales are handled properly using %find_lang
[+] no need to run ldconfig (no shared libraries in the linker's default paths)
[+] no copies of system libraries
[+] package not relocatable
[+] all installed file owend by the package (some directories are owned by the
vdr package)
[+] no file listed more than once in the %files section
[+] file permissions are set properly
[+] consistent use of macros (may be improved concerning the package name,
though)
[+] no need for a -doc subpackage
[+] reasonable use of %doc
[+] no need for a -static or -devel subpackage
[+] package does not contain .la libtool files
[+] no gui application
[+] no files packaged already owned by other packages
[+] all filenames valid UTF-8
####################
# Package Approved #
####################
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
