[Bug 426611] Review Request: monotone-viz - gtk visualizer for monotone revision graphs

[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: monotone-viz - gtk visualizer for monotone revision graphs


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426611





------- Additional Comments From thomas.moschny@xxxxxx  2007-12-30 14:23 EST -------
Note: This is NOT a formal review (as I am not a reviewer yet).

[x] package meets naming guidelines
[x] specfile is encoded in ascii or utf-8
[x] specfile matches base package name
[x] specfile uses macros consistently
[x] specfile is written cleanly
[x] specfile is written in AE
[x] changelog is present and has correct format
[!] license matches actual license
    The help->license box says GPLv2+, the README says GPLv2.
    Should probably be fixed upstream?
[x] license is open source-compatible
[x] license text is included in package
[x] source tag has correct url
[x] source files match upstream
    md5sum: 79306857a378d106166bfdb407eebf1e
[x] latest version is packaged
    version 1.0
[!] summary is concise
    The description says 'GNOME' application, while the summary says 'GTK+.'
[x] full stop after %description
[x] dist tag is present
[x] buildroot is correct
[x] buildroot is prepped
[x] %clean is present
[x] proper build requirements
[x] proper requirements
[x] uses %{?_smp_mflags}
[x] uses %{optflags}
    via %configure
[x] doesn't use %makeinstall
[x] package builds at least on one architecture
    tested on: i386/f8, x86_64/f8
[x] packages installs and runs at least on one architecture
    tested on: i386/f8, x86_64/f8
[x] rpmlint is quiet
[!] final provides/requires look sane
    The specfile uses the standard magic boilerplate for ocaml
    libraries, which is imho not needed for native applications.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required
[x] code, not content
[x] file permissions are appropriate
[x] debuginfo package looks usable
[-] config files marked as %config(noreplace)
[x] owns all the directories it creates
[-] static libraries in -devel subpackage
[-] header files in -devel subpackage
[-] development .so files in -devel subpackage
[-] pkgconfig files in -devel subpackage, requires pkgconfig
[-] no .la files
[x] doesn't need a -docs subpackage
[x] relevant docs are included
[x] doc files are not needed at runtime
[!] provides a .desktop file, build-requires desktop-file-utils
    This is a GUI application, thus needs a .desktop file.
[-] uses %find_lang, build-requires gettext

Additional note(s):

During the build process a 'mtn: misuse: workspace required but not
found' message is printed, this seems to be harmless though.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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]