Bug 478744

I need a sponsor although this is not the first package I have submitted (bug 473583 is the first, which is still has NEW status and has yet to be reviewed).

A few points here:

1. Go through the spec and use macros consistently. Specifically, %{name}, %{version}.
2. Look at the license tag. Re-read: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#GPL_and_LGPL (hint: look at the source code)

3. Look at the Requires that rpm finds automatically. If it finds libgtop-2.0.so.7() as a Requires, you don't need to explicitly list it as a Requires.

4. Instead of wildcarding so aggressively for a single binary and manpage, why not be more specific? 

I'll do a more complete review when I see a new SRPM/SPEC.

(In reply to comment #2)
> A few points here:
> 
> 1. Go through the spec and use macros consistently. Specifically, %{name},
> %{version}.
Done.

> 2. Look at the license tag. Re-read:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#GPL_and_LGPL
> (hint: look at the source code)
> 
Done. Added the correct license tag (GPLv2+) to the spec file.

> 3. Look at the Requires that rpm finds automatically. If it finds
> libgtop-2.0.so.7() as a Requires, you don't need to explicitly list it as a
> Requires.
> 
Done.

> 4. Instead of wildcarding so aggressively for a single binary and manpage, why
> not be more specific? 
> 
Done.

I've also checked both the spec file and rpm with rpmlint and received no errors.

> I'll do a more complete review when I see a new SRPM/SPEC.  
Thanks for your time.

The latest spec and rpm are at:
http://lonetwin.net/wmfire.spec
http://lonetwin.net/wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc10.src.rpm

cheers,
- steve

Good:

- rpmlint checks return nothing
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPLv2+) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream (a0e296c454571dd650abd7d830a311c2c84e9339)
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- 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
- no need for .desktop file

APPROVED.

Thanks for your time, Spot !

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: wmfire
Short Description: WindowMaker dock app that displays cpu, memory or network load as flames
Owners: lonetwin
Branches: F-10 F-11
InitialCC:

cvs done.

wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc11

wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc10

wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update wmfire'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-7419

wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update wmfire'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-7472

wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

wmfire-1.2.3-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.