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=655184 Volker FrÃhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Volker FrÃhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> 2011-02-02 18:47:11 EST --- [+] Good [x] Needs work [0] Does not apply MUST: ===== [+] Naming according to the Package Naming Guidelines [+] Spec file matches base package name [+] Packaging guidelines met [+] License approved for Fedora [+] License field in spec matches [+] License file included, if source package includes it [+] Spec in American English [+] Spec is legible [+] rpmlint: rpmlint ../SRPMS/drupal6-data-1.0-0.4.alpha14.fc13.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal6-data-1.0-0.4.alpha14.fc13.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [+] Sources match upstream md5sum: ce3d19268ecf88ebbb23a4b9cd45052d [+] Builds into binary RPMs on at least one primary architecture: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2758682 [0] ExcludeArch is specified and commented: [0] All build dependencies listed [0] The spec file handles locales properly [0] Calls ldconfig for its shared libraries [0] No bundled system libraries [0] Stated as relocatable package [+] Owns all its directories or requires packages that do [+] No file listing duplicates [+] File permissions correct [+] Consistent use of macros [+] Code or permissible content [0] Large documentation in -doc subpackage [+] No runtime dependency of files listed as %doc [0] Header files in -devel subpackage [0] Static files in -static subpackage [0] Library files without suffix in -devel subpackage [0] Devel-package requires base package [0] No .la libtool archives [0] GUI application includes properly installed %{name}.desktop file [+] No files or directories owned, that other packages own [+] Filenames in packages are UTF-8 SHOULD: ======= [0] Query upstream if no license text is included [+] Package builds in mock: (epel-6-x86_64) [0] Scriptlets are sane, if used [0] Subpackages other than -devel should require base package (versioned) [0] pkgconfig files in -devel subpackage [0] Dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself [0] Contain man pages, where they make sense I didn't try whether it works. NOTE: ===== Use the prerelease and alpha macros in Source0. Please remove the name from the summary. Please beautify the description. Also consider shortening, especially: "You may want to check out Feeds module for using Data as a storage engine for RSS/Atom feed data. know how Data relates to Table Wizard know that Data module is the successor of Flatstore." Descriptions should be no longer than 3 paragraphs. Drop the require for drupal6, since the other packages already require it. Looking closer, it doesn't necessarily NEED the two modules. If you regard the module useless, without the others, leave the Requires. The chmod is not necessary. Files section can be simplified to: ... %doc LICENSE.txt README.txt %{name}-fedora-README.txt CHANGELOG.txt %{drupaldir}/modules/data %exclude %{drupaldir}/modules/data/*.txt %dir is only necessary in the other packages, because there are translations. This package doesn't have any. Nevertheless, it is not wrong. -------- 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review