[Bug 454564] Review Request: pymssql - A simple database interface to MS-SQL for Python

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454564


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

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




--- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx>  2008-08-25 23:48:55 EDT ---
I will simply review what comes out of the buildsys and ignore the permissions
issue.

* source files match upstream:
   7743db3c3c59c872396c9ceed809afb082d742844ed6e99bd94d0cd2127fee01  
   pymssql-0.8.0.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* 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 not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent (ignoring the permission error as described above).
* final provides and requires are sane:
   _mssql.so()(64bit)
   pymssql = 0.8.0-2.fc10
   pymssql(x86-64) = 0.8.0-2.fc10
  =
   freetds >= 0.63
   libpython2.5.so.1.0()(64bit)
   libsybdb.so.5()(64bit)
   python >= 2.4
   python(abi) = 2.5

* %check is not present; test suite needs a running mssql server.
* 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 (ignoring the weird permission issue).
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc 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.

APPROVED

-- 
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.

_______________________________________________
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]