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=658450

Golo Fuchert <packa...@golotop.de> changed:

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

--- Comment #7 from Golo Fuchert <packa...@golotop.de> 2011-05-07 13:35:32 EDT 
---
This is the official review:

-----

[+] = ok
[o] = does not apply
[-] = needs work

-----

[+] rpmlint is quiet enough (false positive):

rpmlint SPECS/ATpy.spec SRPMS/ATpy-0.9.5-1.fc14.src.rpm
RPMS/noarch/ATpy-0.9.5-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 
ATpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recarrays -> rec arrays,
rec-arrays, recalibrate
ATpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recarrays -> rec arrays,
rec-arrays, recalibrate
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

[+] The package is named according to the guidelines
[+] Spec file name matches base package name
[+] The package follows the Packaging Guidelines
[+] The license is an approved licence (MIT)
[+] The License field matches the actual licence
[+] License file from source file is included in %doc
[+] The spec file is written in American English
[+] The spec file is legible
[+] Packaged sources match with upstream sources (md5)

md5sum ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.packaged ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.upstream 
9e030de0f6ed9f59aed3f03010af4012  ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.packaged
9e030de0f6ed9f59aed3f03010af4012  ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.upstream

[+] Package build at least on one primary architecture
[+] ExecludeArch is not known to be needed.
[+] All build dependencies are listed in the BuildRequires section
[o] No locales for the package
[o] Package does not store shared libraries
[+] Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
[o] Package is not relocatable
[+] Package owns all directories it installs.
[+] No files are listed more than once in the %files section
[+] File permissions are set properly (%defattr(...) is used)
[+] Consistent use of macros
[+] Package contains code and documentation only, no content
[+] No large documentation files
[+] %doc files do not affect runtime
[o] No header files included
[o] No static libraries included
[o] library files ending with .so included in devel subpackage
[o] no -devel subpackage
[+] No libtool .la archives included
[o] No GUI application, no need for a .desktop file
[+] Package does not own files or directories that are owned by other packages
[+] All filenames are valid UTF-8

python specific items:

[+] Python eggs are be built from source.
[+] Python eggs do not download any dependencies during the build process.
[o] Not building a compat package.
[o] Not building multiple versions (except python3 version). 

SHOULD items:

[o] Source package does already include license text(s) as a separate file from
upstream
[o] No other Non-English languages supported
[+] The package builds in mock
[o] No koji scratch build because of conditional build macros
[o] No "runable" program packaged to test
[+] No "exotic" scriptlets used
[o] Pyhton3 subpackage does not need to require the base package
[o] no pkgconfig(.pc) files included
[o] No file dependencies
[o] No binaries/scripts -> no man pages needed

-----

No further comments, everything seems to be fine.

-----

PACKAGE APPROVED

-----

-- 
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.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to