[Bug 872783] Review Request: Ray - Parallel genome assemblies for parallel DNA sequencing

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872783

Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
             Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)     |
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #12 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> ---
rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint *.rpm
ray.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d
ray.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US novo -> nova, Nov
ray.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US metagenomes -> meta genomes,
meta-genomes, genomes
ray-common.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d
ray-common.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US novo -> nova, Nov
ray-doc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d
ray-doc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US novo -> nova, Nov
ray-extra.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d
ray-extra.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US novo -> nova, Nov
ray-extra.x86_64: W: no-documentation
ray-mpich2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d
ray-mpich2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US novo -> nova, Nov
ray-mpich2.x86_64: W: no-documentation
ray-openmpi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d
ray-openmpi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US novo -> nova, Nov
ray-openmpi.x86_64: W: no-documentation
7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.

MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate. OK
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK

MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
NEEDSWORK
- Since there is clearly a preference for upper case naming, the package should
be named Ray instead of ray.
* The project name is spelled in upper case
* The tarball name is in upper case
* The source directory in the tarball is in upper case
* The binary is in upper case

MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
- .. but change the name of the spec file too when you change the name.

MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the 
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK
- licensecheck reveals GPL and LGPL files, but it doesn't detect any
versioning.
- manual inspection reveals GPLv3 and LGPLv3, meaning that the license tag
GPLv3 is correct.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines

MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
$ sha1sum Ray-v2.1.0.tar.bz2 ../SOURCES/Ray-v2.1.0.tar.bz2 
4c09f2731445852857af53b65aa47e444792eeb0  Ray-v2.1.0.tar.bz2
4c09f2731445852857af53b65aa47e444792eeb0  ../SOURCES/Ray-v2.1.0.tar.bz2

MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
- The docs are just 40kB, so you could also just drop the -doc package and
include the documentation in -common.

MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. NEEDSWORK
- Add AUTHORS to %doc in -common.

MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned, architecture dependent dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
EPEL5: Clean section exists. OK
EPEL5: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
EPEL5: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A

-- 
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]