1. %define --> %global

2. Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

-->

Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

3. Drop Requires: pkgconfig

4. devel package template:

%package        devel
Summary:        Development files for %{name}
Requires:       %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

%description    devel
This package contains libraries and header files for
developing applications that use %{name}.

5. autoreconf -v --install || exit 1

-->

autoreconf -fiv || exit 1

6. find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.la' | xargs rm -f -- || :

Hint:

find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.la' -delete -print

7. Drop

%defattr(-,root,root,-)

8. %{_includedir}/epoxy/*

You forgot to own the 

%{_includedir}/epoxy/

itself.

Solution:

i. Change to %{_includedir}/epoxy/

ii. A bit detailed:

%dir %{_includedir}/epoxy/
%{_includedir}/epoxy/*

9. http://dri.sourceforge.net

Redirected to http://dri.freedesktop.org/

What I can get from Google is:

https://github.com/anholt/libepoxy

Ideas?

10. Group tags is optional now, you can choose to drop them ;)

I've updated the spec and srpm at the same place, I think I've address all the raised issues,

Thanks for the review.

(In reply to Dave Airlie from comment #2)
> 
> I've updated the spec and srpm at the same place, I think I've address all
> the raised issues,
> 
> Thanks for the review.

NP.

1. %defattr(-,root,root,-)

is still in -devel package ;)

2. Missing one dot at the end of the %description in -devel.

3. https://github.com/anholt/libepoxy/releases

I can see 1.1 has been released about a month ago. So at least "Release: 0.1%{?dist}" is not good for the current status. As there are 11 commits ahead, this package is a snapshot package now:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages

Indeed good point,

okay I've updated the spec and new srpm with a new version as per the wiki.

SRPM link?(Can't be the same in comment 0 per changes you've made to %version)

srpm:http://people.fedoraproject.org/~airlied/epoxy/libepoxy-1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc20.src.rpm

spec is the same one.

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated




===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

Generic:
[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]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck:

MIT/X11 (BSD like)
------------------
libepoxy-20140307/include/epoxy/egl.h
libepoxy-20140307/include/epoxy/gl.h
libepoxy-20140307/include/epoxy/glx.h
libepoxy-20140307/include/epoxy/wgl.h
libepoxy-20140307/src/dispatch_common.c
libepoxy-20140307/src/dispatch_common.h
libepoxy-20140307/src/dispatch_egl.c
libepoxy-20140307/src/dispatch_glx.c
libepoxy-20140307/src/dispatch_wgl.c
libepoxy-20140307/src/gen_dispatch.py
libepoxy-20140307/test/egl_common.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/egl_common.h
libepoxy-20140307/test/egl_has_extension_nocontext.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/egl_without_glx.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_beginend.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_common.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_common.h
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_glxgetprocaddress_nocontext.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_has_extension_nocontext.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_public_api.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_public_api_core.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/glx_static.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/headerguards.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/khronos_typedefs.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/khronos_typedefs.h
libepoxy-20140307/test/khronos_typedefs_nonepoxy.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/miscdefines.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/wgl_common.c
libepoxy-20140307/test/wgl_common.h
libepoxy-20140307/test/wgl_core_and_exts.c

Unknown or generated
--------------------
libepoxy-20140307/.dir-locals.el
libepoxy-20140307/autogen.sh

[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[?]: %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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[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
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

Generic:
[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.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[!]: %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]: 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
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
     Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment.
     See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libepoxy-1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21.i686.rpm
          libepoxy-devel-1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21.i686.rpm
          libepoxy-1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21.src.rpm
libepoxy.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment
libepoxy.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1-0.1 ['1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21', '1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f']
libepoxy.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libepoxy.so.0.0.0 exit
libepoxy-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
libepoxy.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment
libepoxy.src: W: strange-permission make-git-snapshot.sh 0775L
libepoxy.src: W: invalid-url Source0: libepoxy-20140307.tar.bz2
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint libepoxy libepoxy-devel
libepoxy.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment
libepoxy.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1-0.1 ['1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21', '1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f']
libepoxy.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libepoxy.so.0.0.0 exit
libepoxy-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
libepoxy (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    libc.so.6
    libdl.so.2
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libepoxy-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libepoxy(x86-32)
    libepoxy.so.0



Provides
--------
libepoxy:
    libepoxy
    libepoxy(x86-32)
    libepoxy.so.0

libepoxy-devel:
    libepoxy-devel
    libepoxy-devel(x86-32)
    pkgconfig(epoxy)



AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found
------------------------------
  AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: libepoxy-20140307/configure.ac:48


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -rvn libepoxy-1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc20.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

-------------------------------
1. Unknown:
  GEN      glx_generated_dispatch.c
  GEN      gl_generated_dispatch.c
  GEN      egl_generated_dispatch.c
  GEN      wgl_generated_dispatch.c
make  all-am
make[3]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/libepoxy-20140307/src'
  CC       dispatch_common.lo
  CC       gl_generated_dispatch.lo
  CC       egl_generated_dispatch.lo
  CC       dispatch_egl.lo
  CC       glx_generated_dispatch.lo
  CC       dispatch_glx.lo
  CCLD     libepoxy.la

You can see the building process show nothing about the compiler flags(although they are inserted properly), so in this way you should turn off the silent build by passing an option to %configure:

--disable-silent-rules

2. A tests/ folder is included, but no %check section defined. Is it impossible to run tests in koji? If so, please write down some notes there. Otherwise please add it.

3. Fix the changelog:

libepoxy.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1-0.1 ['1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21', '1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f']

These two apply also:

 * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control
 * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github

Even if a script like make-git-snap-shot.sh is included, a one-line comment should tell how to replicate the included source tarball.

srpm: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~airlied/epoxy/libepoxy-1.2-0.1.20140307gitd4ad80f.fc21.src.rpm

same spec file,

I've moved to using the github method, thanks for pointing that out.

Christopher, ping?

PACKAGE APPROVED.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: libepoxy
Short Description: OpenGL pointer management library
Owners: airlied
Branches: f19 f20
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

I see building failure of new snapshot package in koji, but as it has been built with an older version, I will mark this bug as RAWHIDE(f20 not pushed yet).

Hope you can fix the package soon.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: libepoxy
New Branches: el6 epel7
Owners: airlied
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).