Bug 526997
Summary: | Review Request: pdf2svg - Small tool to convert PDF files into SVG | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Ben Boeckel <fedora> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, martin.gieseking, notting |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | chitlesh:
fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | 0.2.1-2.fc11 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2009-10-10 19:45:11 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: | 526844 |
Description
Ben Boeckel
2009-10-02 23:58:52 UTC
Just two quick comments: - Requires: groff doesn't seem to be necessary - drop INSTALL from %doc as it's not of much use in a binary package Ben, I'll do both reviews. Do you mind reviewing this small package for me please ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505264 Missing timestamps during make install : make INSTALL="install -p" install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} The package looks good. Update the spec file too in accordance to the comment #1. I'll finalize the package review. Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/pdf2svg/pdf2svg.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/pdf2svg/pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11.src.rpm Fixed. - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name} - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package is licensed (GPLv2+) with an open-source compatible license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - MUST: 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. - MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files - MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates. - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. - MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible. - MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least i586. - MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires. - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly.: No locales in this package - MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: There are no Large documentation files - MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. - MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries - MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix - MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. SHOULD Items: - SHOULD: The source package doesn't include license text(s) as COPYING - SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i586. - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. - SHOULD: Those scriptlets used are sane. - SHOULD: No subpackages present. Approved New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: pdf2svg Short Description: Small tool to convert PDF files into SVG Owners: mathstuf Branches: F-10 F-11 F-12 InitialCC: cvs done. pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11 pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc12 pdf2svg-0.2.1-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |