https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220342 Debarshi Ray <debarshir@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Debarshi Ray <debarshir@xxxxxxxxxx> --- MUST items ---------- rpmlint output: $ rpmlint compat-libgdata19-0.16.1-1.fc22.src.rpm compat-libgdata19.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libgdata -> libation compat-libgdata19.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libgdata -> libation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. $ rpmlint compat-libgdata19-0.16.1-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm compat-libgdata19.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint compat-libgdata19-debuginfo-0.16.1-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. The spelling mistakes are a false alarm, and there is no need for documentation because this is a compat package and one can use the documentation from libgdata just fine. YES - package follows Naming Guidelines The suffix 19 in the name was chosen to match the soname. This is consistent with compat-libgdata13 that is shipped in RHEL. YES - spec file name matches base package %{name} YES - package follows Packaging Guidelines YES - package is under a Fedora approved license YES - license field matches actual license YES - source package includes license text, which is included in %license YES - spec file written in American English YES - spec file is legible YES - sources match upstream source YES - package compiles on all primary architectures YES - there is no need for ExcludeArch YES - all build dependencies in BuildRequires YES - handles locales properly Translations are excluded. Possibly due to conflicts with libgdata. YES - calls ldconfig in %post and %postun YES - doesn't bundle system libraries YES - package is not relocatable YES - package owns all directories that it creates YES - files are listed only once in %files YES - file permissions are set properly YES - consistent use of macros YES - package contains code or permissible content YES - no need for doc subpackage There is no need for documentation because this is a compat package and one can use the documentation from libgdata just fine. YES - no chance of items marked as %doc affecting runtime YES - no static libraries YES - no need for devel subpackage Development files are excluded because the purpose of this package is only to retain binary compatibility. Newer versions of libgdata have retained API stability, so new builds should be done against it. YES - package removes all libtool archives YES - package doesn't need a .desktop file YES - doesn't own files or directories owned by other packages YES - all filenames are valid UTF-8 SHOULD items ------------ YES - package includes license text from upstream NO - description and summary doesn't have translations YES - package builds in Koji YES - builds on all primary architectures YES - package functions as described YES - package doesn't use scriptlets YES - no subpackages YES - no dependencies outside of /etc/, /bin/, /sbin, etc. YES - no need for man pages ACCEPTED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review