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=663092 Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich <krege@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |krege@xxxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |krege@xxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich <krege@xxxxxxx> 2010-12-22 01:49:36 EST --- And this is a review. Good. =========== # rpmlint oxygen-gtk-1.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm oxygen-gtk-1.0.0-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm oxygen-gtk.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pixmaps -> pix maps, pix-maps, bitmaps oxygen-gtk.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pixmaps -> pix maps, pix-maps, bitmaps 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. rpmlint output could be ignored. The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. ------- Spec name correct, but. Gtk engines are named as gtk-NAME-engine. Could we rename package into gtk-oxygen-engine? There are no guides for it, just common usage. ------- * The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. * The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. * The License field in the package spec file matchs the actual license. * File, containing the text of the license for the package, included in %doc. * The spec file is written in American English. * The spec file for the package is legible. * The sources used to build the package matchs the upstream source with md5sum 441398b4569ce0282c39e5c21cb16dfc. * The package built on F14 x86_64. * There are no locales. * There are no need in ldconfig. * There are no bundle copies of system libraries. * A package owns all directories that it creates. * All files are not listed more than once in the spec file's %files listings. * Permissions on files are set properly. * Package consistently use macros. * The package contains code. * There are no large documentation * Everything included as %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. * No need in -devel. * Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. * All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. SHOULD: * The package built in mock. * The package works as described. Not so good ======= 1) All required build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but cairo-devel is dependence for gtk2-devel and not needed to be call explicitly. 2) Runtime dependence. We can't be sure there are all needed icons installed with gtk2. Main icon theme is hicolor-icons-theme, if we have gtk2, we have it. But this theme containe not all icons. oxygen-icon-theme, ie, containe them. {gnome,nuvolla,...}-icon-theme - the same, but not hicolor-i-t. Somehow we need anything to make sure - we have sufficient icon set. Second is not a blocker. -- 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review