[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Feb 9 22:41:29 UTC 2009


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=457304





--- Comment #2 from Jerry James <loganjerry at gmail.com>  2009-02-09 17:41:28 EDT ---
MUST items:
- rpmlint output:
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
- package name: OK
- spec file name: OK
- Packaging Guidelines: OK; the Python guidelines specify that "BuildRequires:
python" must appear.  It does not in this spec, but that requirement is picked
up transitively via gettext.
- licensing guidelines: OK
- license: FAIL.  The top-level gestikk.py is GPLv2+, but gestikk/condparse.py
is under an MIT license.
- license file
- spec file is American English: OK, although I have a couple of suggestions. 
See below.
- spec file is legible: OK
- sources match upstream: OK, md5sum is 7f30737f0b69633b1112688c68f4e3d9
- builds into binary RPM: OK
- ExcludeArch: OK
- BuildRequires: OK (although I would be happer with an explicit python
dependency)
- Use of %find_lang: OK
- ldconfig: OK
- relocatable package: OK
- own all created directories: OK
- no duplicates in %files: OK, although consider merging "%dir
%{python_sitelib}/%{name}" and "%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/*" into just
"%{python_sitelib}/%{name}".
- proper permissions: OK
- %clean section: OK
- consistent use of macros: OK
- code or permissible content: OK
- large documentation files: OK
- %doc files not needed at runtime: OK
- header files in -devel: OK
- static libraries in -static: OK
- Requires: pkgconfig: OK
- .so files in -devel: OK
- -devel requires base package: OK
- no libtool archives: OK
- desktop file: OK
- don't own files/dirs owned by other packages: OK
- clean first in %install: OK
- filenames are UTF-8: OK

SHOULD items:
- license file as separate text: you should ask upstream to include the MIT
license as a separate file
- description and summary contain translations: OK
- builds in mock: did not check
- builds on all supported arches: did not check
- package functions as described: OK (only lightly tested)
- scriptlets are sane: OK
- subpackages require main package: OK
- placement of pkgconfig files: OK
- file dependencies: OK

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list