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=455227 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-06-23 19:52:31 EDT --- I wanted to get back to this earlier, but I'm somewhat short on time these days. Here's a review. These days %global seems to be preferred over %define, though the differences are subtle and I don't think it makes any particular difference for the two %defines you're using. I think your Source0 should not be a URL if that URL is not valid, such as in the case where you're using a CVS snapshot. I'm not sure why you'd need "PECL:" in the Summary; the upstream site doesn't use that in its summary, and it gives the impression that the name of the package is "PECL". Your BuildRoot: tag is missing any mention of %release. One day soon BuildRoot can go away, but that's not quite here yet and in the meantime it needs to meet the guidelines. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag So only a few minor issues. * source files match upstream (compared manually). * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. ? summary could use a tweak. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. X build root is mising %release. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (F11, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: config(php-pecl-parsekit) = 1.2-2.CVS20090309.fc11 parsekit.so()(64bit) php-pecl(parsekit) = 1.2 php-pecl-parsekit = 1.2-2.CVS20090309.fc11 php-pecl-parsekit(x86-64) = 1.2-2.CVS20090309.fc11 = /bin/sh /usr/bin/pecl config(php-pecl-parsekit) = 1.2-2.CVS20090309.fc11 php(api) = 20041225 php(zend-abi) = 20060613 * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I have no way to test this. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * scriptlets are OK (php module registration). * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review