[Bug 194374] Review Request: kdegames: K Desktop Environment - Games

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Nov 6 22:28:56 UTC 2006


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: kdegames: K Desktop Environment - Games


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194374


cgoorah at yahoo.com.au changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778                      |163779
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From cgoorah at yahoo.com.au  2006-11-06 17:24 EST -------
MUST Items:

- MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}
- MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package is licensed (GPL) with an open-source compatible license and
meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- MUST: the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file,
then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is
included in %doc.
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
- MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least i386.
- MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires.
- MUST: The spec file handles locales properly.
- MUST: If the package does not contain shared library files located in the
dynamic linker's default paths
- MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable
- MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates.
- MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
- MUST: Permissions on files are set properly.
- MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section
of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content. This is described in
detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: There are no Large documentation files
- MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it
is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present.
- MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix 
- MUST: Package containing GUI applications includes a %{name}.desktop file, and
that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install
section.
- MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 

SHOULD Items:

 - SHOULD: The source package does include license text(s) as COPYING
 - SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i386.
 - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
 - SHOULD:  scriptlets are sane. 
 - SHOULD: No subpackages present.

The following should be fixed before uploading to the build systeme, however I
won't block it for that because I know you will update it before doing so.

APPROUVED
 
#001: rpmlint issues
[chitlesh[0] ~]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/result/kdegames-3.5.5-1.fc7.src.rpm
W: kdegames macro-in-%changelog _bindir
W: kdegames mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 81, tab: line 6)
W: kdegames patch-not-applied Patch1: kdegames-3.1.1-konquest.patch

at the same time, you can clean #Patch0: kde-libtool.patch as well

#002  X-Fedora .desktop category is not required anymore
  --add-category="X-Fedora" --vendor="" \


-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list