[Bug 246068] Review Request: mcabber - Console Jabber instant messaging client

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

 



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: mcabber - Console Jabber instant messaging client


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246068


tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx  2007-06-29 12:27 EST -------
Odd how this console app requires most of X to build, but it seems that
gettext-devel pulls it in via its dependency on libgcj.

Please drop the ".mf" after the dist tag, thanks.

Do you think it's worth trying to mark the internal help files as %doc.  I'm
leaning towards no, but they are two-thirds of the size of the package and I
could see this kind of package being useful in a very minimal install.

The desktop file is a nice touch, but there are a couple of issues:

mcabber.desktop: key "Categories" is a list and does not have a semicolon as
trailing character, fixing

/var/tmp/mcabber-0.9.3-1.fc8.mf-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/fedora-mcabber.desktop:
warning: value "" for key "Path" in group "Desktop Entry" does no
t look like an absolute path

I think the former is just a minor upstream error and is no big deal.  The
latter, I'm not sure about.  And doesn't it deserve an icon?

Review:
* source files match upstream:
   ee5bc81da96b958aee7b277bb6fdeeace1a8fff5e41ec61053c63cdb63016406  
   mcabber-0.9.3.tar.bz2
X package meets naming and versioning guidelines (".mf" not valid at end of 
   Release).
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   mcabber = 0.9.3-1.fc8.mf
  =
   libaspell.so.15()(64bit)
   libcrypto.so.6()(64bit)
   libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
   libgpgme.so.11()(64bit)
   libgpgme.so.11(GPGME_1.0)(64bit)
   libncursesw.so.5()(64bit)
   libpanelw.so.5()(64bit)
   libssl.so.6()(64bit)
   libtinfo.so.5()(64bit)
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  I ran the program and it 
   seemed to work OK, but I've no clue how to use Jabber.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.
? Hey, a .desktop file for a lowly console application.  But there seem to be 
   some things wrong with it.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]