[Bug 463744] Review Request: screenruler - GNOME screen ruler

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463744





--- Comment #3 from Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray at gmail.com>  2008-10-01 18:24:42 EDT ---
MUST Items:

OK - rpmlint is unclean on RPM and SRPM
    + [rishi at freebook SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/screenruler-0.85-1.fc9.src.rpm 
      screenruler.src: E: description-line-too-long on your desktop. It can be
used to take both horizontal and vertical measurement
      1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
      [rishi at freebook SPECS]$ rpmlint
../RPMS/noarch/screenruler-0.85-1.fc9.noarch.rpm 
      screenruler.noarch: E: description-line-too-long on your desktop. It can
be used to take both horizontal and vertical measurement
      1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
      [rishi at freebook SPECS]$ 

OK - follows Naming Guidelines
OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec

xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines and Ruby Packaging Guidelines
    + According to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description
      lines in the description should not be longer than 80 characters.
    + According to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines
      each Ruby package must have:
      Requires(abi): ruby
      BuildRequires: ruby
      Is this needed in this case?

OK - license meets Licensing Guidelines
OK - License field meets actual license
OK - upstream license file included in %doc
OK - spec file uses American English
OK - spec file is legible
OK - sources match upstream sources
OK - package builds successfully
OK - ExcludeArch not needed
OK - build dependencies correctly listed
OK - no locales
OK - no shared libraries
OK - package is not relocatable
OK - file and directory ownership
OK - no duplicates in %file
OK - file permissions set properly
OK - %clean present

OK - macros used consistently
    + While in some places you have used %{_name}, you have also used
      'screenruler'. Would be nice if you could use either one of them for the
      sake of consistency.

OK - contains code and permissable content
OK - -doc is not needed
OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime
OK - no header files
OK - no static libraries
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no library files
OK - -devel not needed
OK - no libtool archives

xx - %{name}.desktop file is invalid
    + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop
      desktop-file-validate must be run on the .desktop file, and it says:
      [rishi at freebook SPECS]$ desktop-file-validate
/usr/share/applications/fedora-screenruler.desktop 
      /usr/share/applications/fedora-screenruler.desktop: warning: key
"Encoding" in group "Desktop Entry" is deprecated
      [rishi at freebook SPECS]$ 
      The key "Encoding" is deprecated on all supported versions of Fedora.
      Please consider removing it.
    + Has upstream been notified of our .desktop file?

OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages
OK - buildroot correctly prepped
OK - all file names valid UTF-8

SHOULD Items:

OK - upstream provides license text
xx - no translations for description and summary
OK - package builds in mock successfully
OK - package builds on all supported architectures
OK - package functions as expected
OK - scriptlets not needed
OK - subpackages are not needed
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no file dependencies

-- 
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.