Spec URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/mediawiki-Cite.spec SRPM URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/mediawiki-Cite-0-0.2.20080901svn.src.rpm Description: Citation extension allowing the placing and viewing of footnotes and references articles stored in Mediawiki
I'll review this shortly.
+ = good, x = bad x source files match upstream: - I get different sums, see http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/mediawiki-Cite.txt Let me know if you did it differently. + package meets naming and versioning guidelines. - The version is 0, though, that seems a bit... weird. But, upstream doesn't have a version. x specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. - s/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot} - Might be a good idea to change the svnrev to without an r and use it in the comment that tells us how you created the tarball. + summary is OK. + description is OK. x dist tag is present. - Add %{?dist} to the end of the Release + build root is OK. + license field matches the actual license. + license is open source-compatible. x license text included in package. - Fetch a copy of the GPLv2 in text form and shove it in %doc. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package builds in mock (koji dist-f10 OK, task ID 798507) + package installs properly. + rpmlint is silent. + final provides and requires are sane + %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I'm not sure how you would go about testing this, anyway. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets present. + code, not content. + documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. + %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. Fix above with 'x' for approval
ping?
(In reply to comment #2) > + = good, x = bad > > x source files match upstream: > - I get different sums, see > http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/mediawiki-Cite.txt > Let me know if you did it differently. Per IRC, tar/bzip produce different md5sums for each creation (on my system at least), the files do have the same md5sum > x specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. > - s/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot} > - Might be a good idea to change the svnrev to without an r and use it in the > comment that tells us how you created the tarball. It's created just like any other, as for $ vs %{} is really just cosmetic, something I can fix upon import. > x dist tag is present. > - Add %{?dist} to the end of the Release Not a must - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag#Do_I_Have_To_Use_the_Dist_Tag.3F > x license text included in package. > - Fetch a copy of the GPLv2 in text form and shove it in %doc. This is NOT a must/appropriate solution - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
(In reply to comment #4) > Per IRC, tar/bzip produce different md5sums for each creation (on my system at > least), the files do have the same md5sum Noted. Call it good. > > x specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. > > - s/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot} > > - Might be a good idea to change the svnrev to without an r and use it in the > > comment that tells us how you created the tarball. > It's created just like any other, as for $ vs %{} is really just cosmetic, > something I can fix upon import. Noted. I was blocking on other issues. > > x dist tag is present. > > - Add %{?dist} to the end of the Release > Not a must - > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag#Do_I_Have_To_Use_the_Dist_Tag.3F I don't understand the reasoning behind this, but sure. It's guidelines! ;) > > x license text included in package. > > - Fetch a copy of the GPLv2 in text form and shove it in %doc. > This is NOT a must/appropriate solution - > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text Yeah, I forgot. Call it good. == APPROVED ==
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: mediawiki-Cite Short Description: An extension to provide Citation tools for Mediawiki Owners: nigelj Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-5
cvs done. Note that without a dist tag you will have to be very very carefull of your tags and upgrade path in the f8/f9/rawhide path.
Can we close this?
I'm going to close this since it's available in F-10, devel, and EL-5.