[Bug 198613] Review Request: compat-libgda - gnome database access library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: compat-libgda - gnome database access library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198613


tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163779
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx  2006-09-11 13:20 EST -------
OK, I went to review this one, and found a few really minor issues that I fixed.
If you're ok with the minor changes, this package is approved.

Specifically, I added an xbase conditional (since xbase is in FE), enabled
everything that could be built by default in Fedora, and fixed the libraries so
that they get handled properly by debuginfo. Also, I changed Source0 so it
points to a URL. Last, I fixed the License tags for the provider packages so
that they were GPL (only the core libgda libs are LGPL) and included the LGPL
text in the main package as a %doc.

REVIEW
=======
- rpmlint checks return:
W: compat-libgda-devel no-documentation
W: compat-gda-mysql no-documentation
W: compat-gda-odbc no-documentation
W: compat-gda-postgres no-documentation
W: compat-gda-sqlite no-documentation
W: compat-gda-ldap no-documentation
W: compat-gda-xbase no-documentation

All ok.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (LGPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- locales grabbed with find_lang
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
- devel package ok
- no .la files
- post/postun ldconfig ok
- devel requires base package n-v-r 

APPROVED (assuming you use my spec)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]