[Bug 484386] Review Request: gri - A language for scientific illustration

[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=484386





--- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-07-10 20:29:33 EDT ---
Well, for some definition of "soon".  My time available for reviews comes
infrequently and at random intervals.  Anyway, I do have some time now.  So,
some questions and comments:

The spec file on your web site seems to be out of date compared to what's in
the src.rpm in comment 4.

My understanding is that the emacs files work for both emacs and xemacs.  Did
you also intend to provide an xemacs package?  (I know the emacs/xemacs thing
is rather insane, but that's just the way it is.  If you package for one and
not the other, you can probably expect some bug reports about it.)  Yes, that
means four packages with one file apiece and another block of macros.  If you
only intend to build for Fedora, you can make them noarch, though.

The package includes a test suite in doc/tst_suite; is there any reason not to
run it in a %check section?

Note that the emacs files are GPLv2+, not GPLv2.  The source code actually
contradicts the README file here.  This package in general seems to be a bit
lax about the license version in use.  (license.txt doesn't specify a version,
README does but says v2 only for the emacs mode while gri-mode.el explicitly
says v2+.)  Always trust what's in the source code, but do ask upstream to be
clearer about whether they intended GPLv2 only or GPLv2+.

rpmlint says:
  gri.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs
   (spaces: line 92, tab: line 28)
I don't particularly care; fix this if you like.

  emacs-gri.x86_64: W: no-documentation
  emacs-gri-el.x86_64: W: no-documentation
These are fine.

I note you're not using the %dist tag on this pacakge.  It's not mandatory, but
I do need to ask if you understand the issues that occur when you don't use it
and the procedure for making sure that you keep proper ordering between release
branches.

Your manual Requires: readline should be unnecessary.  rpm correctly finds the
dependency on libreadline.

Your scriptlets should conform to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Texinfo unless you
have some reason why that doesn't work.

-- 
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.