Bug 920875

Summary: Review Request: quadrapassel - GNOME quadrapassel game
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Tanner Doshier <doshitan>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Kalev Lember <kalevlember>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 19CC: kalevlember, notting, package-review, py
Target Milestone: ---Flags: kalevlember: fedora-review+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-05-12 17:03:57 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Tanner Doshier 2013-03-12 23:37:33 UTC
Spec URL: http://doshitan.com/tmp/quadrapassel/quadrapassel.spec
SRPM URL: http://doshitan.com/tmp/quadrapassel/quadrapassel-3.7.90-1.fc19.src.rpm
Description: This is the GNOME game quadrapassel

quadrapassel.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Quadrapassel
quadrapassel.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Quadrapassel
quadrapassel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/quadrapassel-3.7.90/COPYING
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.

Comment 1 Tanner Doshier 2013-04-02 22:47:25 UTC
- Update to 3.8.0

- Update to 3.7.92

Spec URL: http://doshitan.com/tmp/quadrapassel/quadrapassel.spec
SRPM URL: http://doshitan.com/tmp/quadrapassel/quadrapassel-3.8.0-1.fc19.src.rpm

Comment 2 Pierre-Yves Luyten 2013-05-07 22:50:22 UTC

Thanks for the package. I'm not reviewing but just providing a first feedback - actually everything seems fine so far.

As for other gnome games, the license does not appear on the source files but on COPYING and "about" dialog.

[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[?]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: glib-compile-schemas is run if required
     Note: gschema file(s) in quadrapassel
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/buddho/rpmbuild/quadrapassel/licensecheck.txt
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
[-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
     be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[?]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[?]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: update-desktop-database is invoked when required
     Note: desktop file(s) in quadrapassel
[x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked when required
     Note: icons in quadrapassel
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
     Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install if there is
     such a file.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[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]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
     in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
     supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).

===== SHOULD items =====

[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
     from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.

rpmlint on RPM gives the additional warning as for other gnome-games "obsolete-not-provided"

Checking: quadrapassel-3.8.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
quadrapassel.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Quadrapassel
quadrapassel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided gnome-games-quadrapassel
quadrapassel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/quadrapassel-3.8.0/COPYING
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.

Comment 3 Kalev Lember 2013-05-10 22:44:06 UTC
Looks good to me as well. I'm approving it based on Pierre's unofficial review.

Comment 4 Tanner Doshier 2013-05-10 22:53:10 UTC
New Package SCM Request
Package Name: quadrapassel
Short Description: Fit falling blocks together
Owners: doshitan
Branches: f19

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-05-12 16:07:43 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 6 Tanner Doshier 2013-05-12 17:03:57 UTC
Built in rawhide and f19.

Comment 7 Tanner Doshier 2013-05-12 17:10:45 UTC
Messed up the cvs flag, clearing it.