Bug 512523
| Summary: | Review Request: graphem - Mouse Gesture based Authentication Program and Screen Locker | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Dominic Hopf <dmaphy> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Sven Lankes <sven> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | christoph.wickert, fedora-package-review, ian, notting, sven |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | sven:
fedora-review+
j: 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: | 2009-11-15 19:36:59 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
Dominic Hopf
2009-07-18 15:14:57 UTC
Sven, if you plan on reviewing this package, please set the bug to 'ASSIGNED' and the fedora-review flag to '?'. Two issues: 1. I haven't looked through all files yet but at first glance this package looks a lot like being licensed GPLv2+ 2. I'd say that we need at lease some sort of documentation. Maybe a README.Fedora pointing to the website and giving a two sentence introduction? (In reply to comment #2) > Two issues: > > 1. I haven't looked through all files yet but at first glance this package > looks a lot like being licensed GPLv2+ You're right. The GPLv2 was based on the COPYING file, but the other files say GPLv2+. I'll change that in the next release. > 2. I'd say that we need at lease some sort of documentation. Maybe a > README.Fedora pointing to the website and giving a two sentence introduction? I already noticed upstream about the missing documentation and suggested something like a offline html doc. This hopefully will come with version 0.3. I'll talk to upstream to clarify, when graphem 0.3 will be released. I'm not sure but i think it won't take that long. If it takes sudden longer I'll come back to your suggestion and add a README file pointing to the website. Oh - while I'm at it - it's a gui-program so it'll need a .desktop-file as per the guidelines. Just to clarify why I didn't upload a new release yet: I already fixed the issue with the license on my machine, but didn't think this small change was it worth to build and upload a new package. For any other issues i triggered upstream and I was told that graphem 0.3 will be available at the end of the coming week. So I think it's better to wait until this release with building and uploading a new package release instead of backporting those fixes for 0.2. I did *not* forget this issue. Updates available: Spec URL: http://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/graphem/graphem.spec SRPM URL: http://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/graphem/graphem-0.3-1.fc11.src.rpm md5sums a26594c15849b5751484537755205b8d graphem.spec da1e204a5950f4f5e01ca5fe382ea74a graphem-0.3-1.fc11.src.rpm As I promised this includes an additional README and a .desktop-file from upstream. It also ships a Changelog where additional information on the changes of the program itself can be found. Only remaining issue is that you're using a vendor-tag of 'fedora' in desktop-file-install. I'll approve the review once this is fixed. Spec URL: http://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/graphem/graphem.spec SRPM URL: http://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/graphem/graphem-0.3-3.fc11.src.rpm md5sums feca9c1d51d977d6110215635050f8b4 graphem.spec a5617606668fa120ecac8ed629430ca7 graphem-0.3-3.fc11.src.rpm This fixes the issue with the vendor tag and adds also a patch which adds the graphem icon to the desktop-file. Patch URL: http://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/graphem/graphem-0.3.add-icon-to-desktopfile-00.patch 3e20d525764b03218f15021a36a36afa graphem-0.3.add-icon-to-desktopfile-00.patch Spec URL: http://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/graphem/graphem.spec d2b588f6d84f2aa6950b1fb201e84068 graphem.spec Removed an unneccesary commented line from the specfile. Packages are the same. Package Review
==============
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture.
Tested on: rawhide/x86_64
[x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM: empty
binary RPM:empty
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License: GPLv2+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: 3717045e78de65c566a23bc4c8ee3edcf8b21a89 graphem-0.3.tar.gz
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[x] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: f11/x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: x86_64
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: graphem Short Description: Mouse Gesture based Authentication Program and Screen Locker Owners: dmaphy Branches: F-11 InitialCC: CVS done. graphem-0.3-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/graphem-0.3-3.fc11 graphem-0.3-3.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 graphem'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-9617 graphem-0.3.1-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/graphem-0.3.1-1.fc11 all done |