[Bug 481322] Review Request: emacs-magit - Emacs interface to the most common Git operations

[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=481322





--- Comment #2 from Jerry James <loganjerry at gmail.com>  2009-01-27 14:48:00 EDT ---
MUST items:
- rpmlint output:
emacs-magit-el.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
- package name: follows Emacs-specific guidelines
- spec file name matches base package name: OK
- packaging guidelines: OK
- approved Fedora license: OK
- License field matches actual license: FAIL
The file magit.el includes the "or later" phrase, so the license is actually
GPLv3+, not GPLv3.  Furthermore, the info file contains a declaration that it
is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2 or any later
version.  Therefore, the License field should read "GPLv3+ and GFDL+".  The
guidelines strongly encourage you to separate the info file into a separate
subpackage, so that each can have a single license, but I will not insist on
this.
- File containing license should be in %doc: FAIL.  You must add COPYING to the
%doc line in the spec file.  Why is that empty, by the way?  I suggest also
adding AUTHORS, ChangeLog, NEWS, and README to the %doc line.
- spec file in American English: OK
- spec file is legible: OK
- source URL guidelines: FAIL
Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL.  In short, you
need to add a comment saying how to produce the source tarball.  See the
section entitled "Using Revision Control".
- builds on at least one arch: OK
- appropriate use of ExcludeArch: OK
- complete BuildRequires: FAIL
The use of autoreconf triggers an invocation of automake.  Since automake
Requires autoconf, you can simply replace "autoconf" with "automake" on the
BuildRequires line.
- locale handling: OK
- use of ldconfig: OK
- relocatable package: OK
- own all created directories: OK
- no duplicate %files entries: OK
- proper file 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 packages require base package: OK
- no .la archives: OK
- desktop file: OK
- do not own files/directories created by other packages: OK
- clean build root before installing: OK
- filenames are valid UTF-8: OK

SHOULD items:
- query upstream for license text: the tarball includes the text of GPLv3 in
COPYING, but does not include the GFDL text that I can see.  Please ask
upstream to include it in future releases.
- include available translations: OK
- package builds in mock: OK
- package builds on all supported architectures: DID NOT CHECK
- package functions as described: MINIMAL TESTING ONLY
- sane scriptlets: OK
- subpackages require the base package: OK
- pkgconfig files in -devel: OK
- file dependencies: OK

Finally, just a note that you can replace "-n %{name}-el" with just "el" in the
%package, %description, and %files lines where it appears.

-- 
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.