[Bug 165992] Review Request: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: Glide3-libGL - Glide3 OpenGL library for use with 3Dfx Voodoo 1 & 2 cards


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165992





------- Additional Comments From chabotc at xs4all.nl  2006-01-16 04:25 EST -------
Hmm confusing naming, Mesa is 'Mesa' and not 'mesa' in the libGL package (only
changed very recently for modular x), but your right about the Glide3 /
Glide3-devel package names, however its all PackageNamingGuidelines compliant
and both cases have a disadvantage, so i'll fully trust your judgement on this.

MUST review items:
- Builds cleanly on FC5 devel.
- rpmlint output:
W: Glide3-libGL invalid-license MIT/X11, and others
- Source included matches upsteam source (md5sum)
- Package name meets guidelines
- spec file name is in %{name}.spec format
- Licence (when changed to MIT/X11) is fedora extra's compatible & is included
in spec
- Spec file is in (american) english
- Does not list buildrequires that are excepted in the package guidelines
- All build dependencies are listed
- No ldconfig needed
- All files have proper permissions
- Package is not relocatable
- No duplicate files in %files section
- No missing files in %files section (only ships basic so & shell script)
- Has a proper %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
- Uses macro's described in PackagingGuidelines
- No entries in %doc that are required for standard program operation
- No -devel package needed (3d programs use standard libGL for -devel files)
- Proper directory-ownerships

Should items:
- Includes upstream licence file (licence.html)
- No insane scriplets
- No unnescesarry requires

Package does have an exclusive arch, and the guidlines do have something to say
about this (from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageReviewGuidelines):
Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed in bugzilla,
describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that
architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla entries
during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment
until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the
long explanation with the bug number.

However i'm not so sure Voodoo3D hardware even works in a PPC machine, or ever
was put in a PPC machine (the only architecture your missing), so if this is the
case you can skip that step of filing a bug for it.

Please update / clarify the licence and i can sign off on the updated src.rpm
and change to FE-ACCEPT 

-- 
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.