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: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216734 ------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxx 2007-06-05 01:19 EST ------- 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(GPL) 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: abc042ed0b5606a1bb9f59403cde62f9 gnome-compiz-manager-0.9.14.tar.gz abc042ed0b5606a1bb9f59403cde62f9 gnome-compiz-manager-0.9.14.tar.gz.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun See below - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. See below - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - .la files are removed. OK - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. See below - Package owns all the directories it creates. 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 sane scriptlets. See below - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. OK - Should have dist tag See below - Should package latest version Issues: 1. The description could have some pluralizations and such to make it more readable in english, perhaps something like: Gnome compiz manager is small utility, which manages GL Desktop configurations on XGL/AiGLX. It’s composed of two applications : - compiz-tray-icon : which launches and stops compiz - gnome-compiz-preferences : which adjusts GL effects The goal isn’t to expose all compiz options but allow a simple configuration of compiz. 2. The latest version seems to be 0.10.4. Could you update to that? I can run another quick review check of that version if you like. 3. The -devel subpackage should "Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}" 4. Since you're installing a desktop file, you need a: BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils 5. You should own the /usr/lib/gnome-compiz-manager/ directory. 6. Since the devel subpackage has a .pc file in it, it should Requires: pkgconfig. 7. Is there a reason to include the static libraries? static libs shouldn't be included unless there is a very good reason for them. 8. In regards to the comment in the files section: # do these get tagged doc? %{_docdir}/* They do get tagged as doc files. However, it's better to use the %doc macro on them. That would install them in /usr/share/doc/%{name}-%{version}, which is the standard place. As it is now, they are in a /usr/share/doc/%{name}/ dir. 9. rpmlint says: a. W: gnome-compiz-manager non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/gnome-compiz-preferences.schemas Suggest: I think you can ignore this. b. E: gnome-compiz-manager zero-length /usr/share/doc/gnome-compiz-manager/README Suggest: don't ship useless README? c. W: gnome-compiz-manager summary-not-capitalized compiz configuration utility W: gnome-compiz-manager summary-not-capitalized compiz configuration utility Suggest: capitalize? d. W: gnome-compiz-manager-devel no-documentation Suggest: Ignore. e. W: gnome-compiz-manager-devel objdump-failed objdump: libXF86Config-parser.a: File format not recognized Suggest: don't ship .a files? ;) -- 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