[Bug 428579] Review Request: mkdst - Source repository to tarball release tool

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Jan 13 20:28:56 UTC 2008


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: mkdst - Source repository to tarball release tool


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428579


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-01-13 15:28 EST -------
The only nitpick I can find is that the first line of %description isn't
grammatically a sentence.  But honestly, there's nothing worth complaining
about.

* source files match upstream:
   6ea7d6db3fd86b2dc3eaf6c00012ebf5fd0fe81963b10e51d3b45d9578aa1629
   mkdst-0.1.tar.bz2
  (downloaded manually since there is no permanent location yet)
* 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 included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none).
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64.
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   mkdst = 0.1-1.fc9
  =
   /bin/sh
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

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, or are watching someone who is.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list