Bug 454199
| Summary: | Review Request: pentaho-libxml - Namespace aware SAX-Parser utility library | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Caolan McNamara <caolanm> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Colin Walters <walters> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting, walters |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | walters:
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: | 2008-08-06 18:00:20 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 457263 | ||
|
Description
Caolan McNamara
2008-07-06 14:16:12 UTC
[+] source files match upstream [+] package meets naming and versioning guidelines - Can you annotate the patch to say whether it is going to be upstreamed? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PatchUpstreamStatus [+] specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently [+] dist tag is present. [+] build root is correct. (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) is the recommended value, but not the only one) [+] license field matches the actual license. [+] license is open source-compatible. [+] license text included in package. [+] latest version is being packaged (as far as I can tell) [+] BuildRequires are proper [+] %clean is present. [+] package builds in koji [+] package installs properly [+] rpmlint is silent. [+] owns the directories it creates. [+] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [+] no duplicates in %files. [+] file permissions are appropriate. [+] code, not content. [+] -javadoc package exists and works [+] %doc exists Looks good to me. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: pentaho-libxml Short Description: Namespace aware Java SAX-Parser utility library Owners: caolanm Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes cvs done. |