Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Revisor - Revisor GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236642 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx 2007-05-04 03:50 EST ------- The GOOD + naming is good + specfile name matches base package name + specfile written in english-ese and is legible + included source md5sum checks with upstream source as listed in SOURCE0 url 9b1bb4207f9c8a64609d1007420955ef revisor-2.0.1.tar.gz + builds on x86 fedora-development in mock + no locales + not relocatable + clean section is okay + consistent use of macros + permissible code and content + items in doc are not runtime necessary + does not obviously own files from another package + directory ownership of parent directories is accounted for in package deps. + No .la files + No devel subpackage + Need need to for shared libraries sciptlets + no need for scriptlets. The BAD - Licensed as GPL but COPYING file NOT included in docs!! - install section has a problem needs to include a desktop-file-install stanza to install the desktop file correctly, and require desktop-file-utils Refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop ? permissions on pilgrim.py Is pilgrim.py meant to be run stand-alone as an executable. You should either strip the shell invocation at the top of the file or make it executable. The Suggestions: You can remove pam from the requires list, usermode requires pam. I know I know i suggested it originally, based on just the directory ownership crap. But taking a closer look the pam requires is redundant. I haven't actually used this yet. Is there a simple example walkthrough on usage? Like how to make a stupidly simple livedvd image or something, so I dont have to think about the package selection but I can test the wizard interface. rpmlint revisor-2.0.1-4.fc7.noarch.rpm E: revisor non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/revisor/pilgrim.py 0644 W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/pungi-fc6-i386.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/revisor-fc6-ppc.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/pungi-f7-i386.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/pungi-fc6-ppc.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/pungi-fc6-x86_64.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/revisor-fc6-x64_86.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/revisor-fc6-i386.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/sample-ks.cfg W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/revisor.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/security/console.apps/revisor W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/revisor/conf.d/revisor-f7-i386.conf W: revisor non-conffile-in-etc /etc/pam.d/revisor -- warnings are bogus, might want to patch the pilgrim.py to either be executable or to strip the intepreter from the first line. rpmlint revisor-2.0.1-4.fc7.src.rpm W: revisor strange-permission revisor.spec 0600 -- not important, but you might consider making it world and group readable by default. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review