Bug 251525
| Summary: | Review Request: bibexport - Extract entries from BibTeX and .aux files | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Patrice Dumas <pertusus> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | j:
fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2007-10-27 18:51:22 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Patrice Dumas
2007-08-09 15:21:49 UTC
Builds fine; rpmlint says: bibexport.noarch: W: invalid-license LaTeX According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing, the License: tag should be "LPPL". Otherwise everything looks good. Review: * source files match upstream: 878458e6d161d876f049d2e2839e417260b50b180bb0756829a54e06cb18ed72 bibexport.zip * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license (well, it uses the wrong abbreviation) * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly X rpmlint has a valid complaint * final provides and requires are sane: bibexport = 2.10-1.fc8 = /bin/sh /usr/bin/texhash tetex * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I have no idea at all how to test this package. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets look OK (texhash is called because of files in /usr/share/texmf/bibtex/bst/bibexport) * code, not content. * The documentation PDF is ten times the size of everything else in the package combined, but teh package is still only 160K so there's no point in splitting anything. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED, provided you fix up the License: tag. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: bibexport Short Description: Extract entries from BibTeX and .aux files Owners: pertusus [ AT ] free.fr Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes Owners: should contain FAS account names, not (obscured) email addresses. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: bibexport Short Description: Extract entries from BibTeX and .aux files Owners: pertusus Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes I wasn't aware about that very good change. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: bibexport Short Description: Extract entries from BibTeX and .aux files Owners: pertusus Branches: EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes Sorry, I forgot the EPEL branches... cvs done. Built, thanks Tibbs. |