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=492203 --- Comment #4 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) <pahan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-06-30 12:11:47 EDT --- Here is the review: +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing MUST Items: [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. rpmlint silent [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [=] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. # src/SevenZip is LGPLv2+ or CPL # The rest is GPLv2+ License: GPLv2+ and (LGPLv2+ or CPL) but changelog says what SevenZip now not included. So, I think license shoild be GPLv2+ now only. [-] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. Package include dreamfabric Dknob component http://www.dreamfabric.com/java/knob/knob.html this is not mention any license in sourse. License text also not included. Did you contact with author and ask license? Also petersalomonsen component included. License there same GPLv2+, but it is not acceptable bundle any (source or compiled JARs) components in package: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Pre-built_JAR_files_.2F_Other_bundled_software all such components must be separate packaged and reviewed. [+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [-] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. No. Package contains script to fetch source from SVN (frinika-snapshot.sh), but it revision number not provided. And you should add comment how you get source. In you case it may be simple note about proper usage of frinika-snapshot.sh. It must be command to copy/paste reproduce. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control One hint, instead of do "svn checkout" ("svn co") and then delete .svn directory, you may do just "svn export" Also other sources must have comment where it placed. Please refer to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Referencing_Source whan link is not accesable. [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Build successful - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1444150 [+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. This is noarch package. [-] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires BuildRequires: ant missing. You provide ant into build-jar-repository, so, its needed. [+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Package does not have locale files. [+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. No shared library files here. [+] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review I think package is not relocatable. [+] 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. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] 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. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. [=] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage. There only may be considered move examples into separate subpackage. But its have small size, and I do not require it. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. No header files, this is java package [+] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. No static libraries. [+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). No such files. [+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. No libraries. [+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} Devel package absent. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: [+] 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. COPYING file included. [=] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Built in koji http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1444150 [=] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. Error: Missing Dependency: SevenZip is needed by package frinika-0.5.1-3.521svn.fc11.noarch (/frinika-0.5.1-3.521svn.fc11.noarch) Error: Missing Dependency: tootaudioservers >= 3 is needed by package frinika-0.5.1-3.521svn.fc11.noarch (/frinika-0.5.1-3.521svn.fc11.noarch) This dependencies is only in rawhide? [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [+] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [+] SHOULD: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Additionals: Must: [-] Patches. Each included patch must have link to upstream bagtracker or comment why it can't be done. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PatchUpstreamStatus Should: [=] I think in command: ln -s %{_libdir}/flexdock/flexdock-0.5.1.jar lib/flexdock.jar || \ Will be cool replace "0.5.1" by something like %{version} Please correct these issues. -- 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