[Bug 701426] Review Request: python-taboot - Client utility for scripted multi-system administration over Func

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=701426

--- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-05-07 15:45:00 EDT ---
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name. 
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. 
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. 
OK - License GPLv3+
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
676c7ef0093bbd43298cedf934420143  python-taboot-0.2.12.tar.gz
676c7ef0093bbd43298cedf934420143  python-taboot-0.2.12.tar.gz.orig
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. 
See below - Package has a correct %clean section. 
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content. 
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. 
OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. 
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. 
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. 
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. 
OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions)
See below - No rpmlint output. 
OK - final provides and requires are sane.

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock. 
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should function as described. 
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin

Issues: 

1. Not a blocker, but: There's no need to use macros for things that are longer
than 
the command they replace, ie, %{__make} vs just 'make'. I think the non macro
versions
make the spec more readable, but it's up to you. 

2. Both the main package and subpackage require func, so what is the advantage
of 
having the subpackage? I guess to install on clients only? 

3. You don't need a clean section if you aren't targeting EPEL (which I hope
you are)
but why the "%{__make} clean" at the top of it? 

4. rpmlint says: 
taboot-func.noarch: W: no-documentation
which can be ignored.

-- 
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


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