[Bug 452714] Review Request: Quassel - Distributed IRC Client and Core application

[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: Quassel - Distributed IRC Client and Core application


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452714


cra at wpi.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |cra at wpi.edu




------- Additional Comments From cra at wpi.edu  2008-06-24 18:43 EST -------
Partial review:

rpmlint output:

>rpmlint quassel-0.2.0-1.fc9.src.rpm 
quassel.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 7)
[This is fine]

quassel.src: E: description-line-too-long Quassel IRC is a modern, distributed
IRC client, meaning that one (or multiple) client(s) can attach to and detach
from a central core --
quassel.src: E: description-line-too-long much like the popular combination of 
screen and a text-based IRC client such as WeeChat, but graphical
[Please wrap the text into a paragraph of no more than 80-characters per line]

quassel.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
[Please include version after each changelog header line like this:
* Sat Jun 23 2008 Steven Parrish <smparrish[at]shallowcreek.net> 0.2.0-0.1.beta1
]

quassel.src: W: invalid-license GPLv2 GPLv3
[correct syntax is "or" between each license:
License: GPLv2 or GPLv3
]

quassel.src: W: strange-permission quasselclient.desktop 0777
quassel.src: W: strange-permission quasselcore.desktop 0777
quassel.src: W: strange-permission quassel.desktop 0777
quassel.src: W: strange-permission quassel.spec 0777
[Since these desktop files originated as included Source: the easiest way to fix
these is to chmod 644 *.desktop before you build]

Packaging Review MUST Items:
+ for items that pass review
- for required changes
? for suggestions or needs investigation

+ package name matches upstream
- version/release doesn't follow guidelines for beta/pre-release versions:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages

I suggest using:

Version: 0.2.0
Release: 0.1.beta1%{?dist}

+ spec file name matches package name
- License is good: dual GPLv2 / GPLv3, but as stated above, License tag needs to
use correct syntax for dual-license scenario:

License: GPLv2 or GPLv3

- Need to include gpl-v2.txt, gpl-v3.txt, and COPYING in the package as %doc
+ spec is in American English
? suggest blank line before %clean and between other sections for readability
+ Source0: URL download sha1sum matches src in package:
36fe1f1352f79f77d824d076add4e9e24c49ba75  quassel-0.2.0-beta1.tar.bz2
+ Package built successfully in koji, BuildRequires apparently fine
? Why are you manually installing only a few files rather than using "make install"?
+ owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate %files
+ permissions look good on installed files
+ has a proper %clean section
- please use %{_datadir} macro in place of /usr/share
+ package contains code suitable for Fedora packaging
- no documentation - consider including README and any other documentation (not
INSTALL build instructions though)
? For your core and client subpackages: In the vast majority of cases, devel
packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
+ Desktop files are present and installed with desktop-file-install
+ no shared directory ownerships
+ rm -rf %{buildroot} at beginning of %install


-- 
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.