Spec Name or Url: http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/colorscheme.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/colorscheme-0.2.1-1.src.rpm Description: Have you ever been re-finishing a room in your home and found yourself asking "What color would go well with this" ? Or been working on a website and not able to find the perfect colorscheme to go with the company logo ? Try GNOME Colorscheme. GNOME Colorscheme is a very simple application for the GNOME desktop that allows you to generate a variety of colorschemes from a single starting color.
APPROVED But see Notes. b017737456db88209a405e26b81b6f64 colorscheme.spec 49ee1ae0b442054e1857a27d90591f6e colorscheme-0.2.1-1.src.rpm Good: * Package name follows namng guidelines. * spec is named after the package name. * License is GPL, matches the spec name, and is included in the package. * Spec file is legible * Builds on x86_64. * No ExcludeArchs yet. * No excluded BuildRequires. * Builds in mock * Matches upstream source * Owns all directories * No duplicate files * Permissions set correctly * Has %clean section * Makes good use of macros * Code not content * Properly contains a .desktop file. Minor: * rpmlint gives: W: colorscheme wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/colorscheme-0.2.1/TODO This could be fixed with dos2unix, ignored, or the TODO file could be left out of the distribution. It isn't terribly useful. Notes: * colorscheme has its own unittests. These are enabled by buildrequiring cppunit-devel and running make check in the %check section. I tried to run the tests on the current package and found that quite a few of them failed. If this isn't known, you might want to run the tests and submit a bug upstream. * I don't believe there's a lot of value in including the .sig. A reviewer still has to go to the project website to verify the origin of the .sig and (most of the time) that the key seems to belong to the upstream author. The .sig should be checked by the reviewer but not included in the finished package. If you have/know of another view, feel free to share.
> unittests I've added a "make check || :" in the rpm, and reported the failed tests upstream. > signature Agreed, if the sig is not signed by people you trust, it's as valuable as an MD5SUM. Removed. I'll import the package with these modifications.