Bug 188435

Summary: Review Request: glibrary-1.0.1
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Damien Durand <splinux>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa>
Status: CLOSED CANTFIX QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhide   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-09-05 10:08:51 EDT Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 201449    

Description Damien Durand 2006-04-09 18:45:45 EDT
Spec Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/glibrary/glibrary.spec
SRPM Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/glibrary/glibrary-1.0.1-1.fc6.src.rpm

Description: GLibrary is small, but useful book manager based on GTK+ and SQLite 
database engine. It can store base informations like: author, genere, 
publisher, translators and many others.
Comment 1 Tom "spot" Callaway 2006-04-11 17:55:36 EDT
Before I review this, I'd like to see a new package that has the following
blockers fixed:

- All of the Requires are unnecessary. In general, anything listed as a
foo-devel package in BuildRequires will automatically be picked up as Requires:
foo, you do not need to hardcode it.
- You're missing one BuildRequires, hint: look in your %install section for any
binary calls that are not listed in BR
- Don't use %{_datadir}/*, this will cause unnecessary directory ownership.
Hint: look at the directories created under %{_datadir}, is there a top level
directory that you _do_ want to own? You should avoid wildcards wherever possible.
- You're not handling locales properly in this package. Look at what
PackageReviewGuidelines says about locales.
Comment 2 Damien Durand 2006-04-30 08:35:29 EDT
The spec file was reorganised.

Spec Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/glibrary/glibrary.spec
SRPM Name or Url:
http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/glibrary/glibrary-1.0.1-1.fc6.src.rpm
Comment 3 Tom "spot" Callaway 2006-05-01 12:07:38 EDT
Much better! The one point (not a blocker) is that you can use:
%{_datadir}/%{name}/

instead of 

%{_datadir}/%{name}/*

Gives you the same end result. I try to avoid * wherever possible.

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:

W: glibrary incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0.1-2 1.0.1-1
E: glibrary script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/glibrary-1.0.1/README
E: glibrary script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/glibrary-1.0.1/AUTHORS
E: glibrary script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/glibrary-1.0.1/COPYING
E: glibrary script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/glibrary-1.0.1/ChangeLog

Make sure you bump your release number when you make a change. :)
Also, you should chmod -x those doc files, so that rpmlint doesn't think that
they are scripts.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- locales handled properly
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- .desktop file ok (might consider adding an icon)

All in all, this is much better. Just some minor changes to make before you
build, but I'm convinced that you have a better grasp on things.

APPROVED.
Comment 4 Ville Skyttä 2006-05-01 12:22:17 EDT
(In reply to comment #3)
> Much better! The one point (not a blocker) is that you can use:
> %{_datadir}/%{name}/
> 
> instead of 
> 
> %{_datadir}/%{name}/*
> 
> Gives you the same end result.

Nope, the former results in ownership of the directory in the package (which is
desirable in this case), the latter does not.  Properly owning dirs is a MUST
per the review guidelines.
Comment 5 Kevin Fenzi 2006-09-02 16:36:54 EDT
This package is APPROVED, but I don't see that it's been imported/built. 

Please import and close this bug with NEXTRELEASE. 
(You should probibly make sure you own the datadir/name as mentioned in comment 
#4. as well)
Comment 6 Damien Durand 2006-09-05 10:08:51 EDT
This project is dead, I close this report.