[Bug 825333] Review Request: libopkele - A C++ implementation of the OpenID decentralized identity system

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825333

Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #13 from Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@xxxxxxxxx> ---
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 MIT
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:
Provided: 47a7efbdd2c9caaaa8e4360eb2beea21
Upstream: 47a7efbdd2c9caaaa8e4360eb2beea21

OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. 
OK - Package is code or permissible content. 
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. 
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. 
OK, See below - 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)
OK, 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. Why both 
- %dir %{_includedir}/opkele
and
- %{_includedir}/opkele/*.h
and not just
%{_includedir}/opkele ?


2. Rpmlint says:
libopkele.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementor ->
implementer, implement or, implement-or
libopkele-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

The spelling error can be ignored, no-doc makes sense as the documentation is
in the main package.



Please look at my first issue, but this package is

APPROVED

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IvvpY9ZY6H&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
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]