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=815814 --- Comment #14 from Joe VLcek <JVLcek@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-27 14:18:19 EDT --- My review input for the SHOULDs ========================================================= >From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines FAIL 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. I don't see a license text file. I suggest the packager SHOULD query upstream to include one. WARN SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. I believe Vit Ondruch's input in Comment 13 addresses this. OK SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. OK SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. WARN SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. I know very little about running ruby ... I tried running "rake test" with no luck. I assume this works NA SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. OK SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. NA 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. NA 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. OK SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. README.md seems OK to me -- 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