[Bug 185423] Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR

[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: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR
Alias: php-pear-PCP

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185423





------- Additional Comments From chris.stone at gmail.com  2006-06-28 17:03 EST -------
rpmlint output:
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging invalid-license The PHP License v3.01
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging no-documentation
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging dangerous-command-in-%post install
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging invalid-license The PHP License v3.01
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging patch-not-applied Patch1:
php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging-0.1.2-fedora-conventions2.patch
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging patch-not-applied Patch0:
php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging-0.1.2-fedora-conventions1.patch
W: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging patch-not-applied Patch2:
php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging-0.1.2-initdepname.patch

These patches are applied, they just cannot be applied in the usual way due to
PHP packaging process.

The dangerous command can be ignored (you can surpress this warning by adding
quote around the install, like 'install', if you decide to do this you should
add a comment to your spec file saying you are doing this to surpress spurious
rpmlint warnings.

The License discussion is below I am going to highly recommend you do as I say
about the license issue, I talked to several FESCo members about this subject.

- package conforms to PHP package naming guidelines
- spec file name matches %{name}
- package meets packaging guidelines
- package licensed with open source compatible license
- package does not include license text
- spec file written in American english
- spec file is legible
- sources match upstream
b8b3e3791c687e8ddaaeac7c65732233  PEAR_Command_Packaging-0.1.2.tgz
- package successfully compiles and builds on FC-5 x86_64
- Not all BuildRequires are sane
Should use:
BuildRequires: php-pear >= 1.4.9
Requires(post): php-pear >= 1.4.9
Requires(pre):  php-pear >= 1.4.9
- package does not use locales
- package does not put .so files in standard directories (no need to run ldconfig)
- package owns all directories it creates
- defattr permissions are okay
- package contains proper %clean section
- macro usage is consistant
- package contains permissible content
- no large documentation
- doc files do not affect runtime
- package does not need a devel sub package
- package does not contain any libtool archives
- package does not need a .desktop file
- package does not own any files or directories owned by other packages

=========================================
  SUMMARY
=========================================
SHOULD FIX:
- Change license tag to just "PHP License"
- Include actual license in %doc

This has the benefit of having an _actual_ license to look at, not just a
license name.  It also kills off three rpmlint warnings.  It also makes it
absolutely clear about the licensing agreement.

Comment from a FESCo member about this (Ville Skyttä):
scop |  I'd use just "PHP License"
scop |  the License tag is not legally binding anyway, and including specific
version number has potential for bitrot

I am not going to make this a blocker, but I strongly recommend you follow my
guidelines on this.  An actual license is _always_ better than just a version
number in the header.


MUST FIX:
- The package contains /usr/share/pear/PEAR/Command/Packaging.php.orig
This looks like a leftover from a patch operation or something.  It should not
be included as one of the files in the package.
- Use the following Requires:
BuildRequires: php-pear >= 1.4.9
Requires(post): php-pear >= 1.4.9
Requires(pre):  php-pear >= 1.4.9
Your current "Requires:" line looks okay
- Include the following macro at the top of your spec:
%define datadir %(pear config-get data_dir 2> /dev/null || echo
%{_datadir}/pear/data)
and use %{datadir} in your %files section

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.