https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127414 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #1) > Package Review > ============== > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review needed > > > Issues: > ======= > - Package does not use a name that already exists. > Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pstreams-devel > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names Yes, because this is to unretire an existing package, so obviously it uses the existing name. > - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size > (~1MB) or number of files. > Note: Documentation size is 1290240 bytes in 77 files. > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/#_documentation I'm not sure the documentation is even worth shipping. I'll either remove it or put it in a separate -doc subpackage (which would leave the main -devel package containing exactly one header file and a license file). > ===== MUST items ===== > [?]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. No ExcludeArch is required. > ===== SHOULD items ===== > > Generic: > [!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. The spec file says: make %{?_smp_mflags} EXTRA_CXXFLAGS="$CXXFLAGS" make docs And the 'docs' target runs a single perl command as a prerequisite, then just runs Doxygen. There is no point running two commands (which cannot happen in parallel) with -j. > [?]: Package functions as described. It's been in Fedora for many years until retired early this year. > [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. No, because it's a noarch package consisting of a single header file, there are no binary files to install. > [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. The tests run as part of the %build step, I'll move them to %check. > Comments: > a) Consider using a separate documentation package Will do. > b) Can the tests be run as well? Possibly excluding those that need network > access. They already run. I'll move them to %check to make that more obvious. Thanks for the review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127414 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
