Hide Forgot
Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pygtkchart.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pygtkchart-0-0.gitg8a56364.fc14.src.rpm Project URL: http://notmyname.github.com/pygtkChart/ Description: pygtkChart is a Python package that provides PyGTK widgets to simply integrate charts into a GTK application. Currently pygtkChart comes with four widgets: - BarChart - shows a bar chart (see example on the right) - MultiBarChart - like BarChart, but shows groups of bars - PieChart - shows simple pie charts The appearance of the widgets is highly customable. All bars, graphs, or titles on a chart can be accessed and modified separately. Colors, backgrounds and many more properties can be modified for each object. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3045828 rpmlint output: [fab@laptop023 SRPMS]$ rpmlint pygtkchart-0-0.gitg8a56364.fc14.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [fab@laptop023 noarch]$ rpmlint pygtkchart* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
*** Bug 701440 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
$ rpmlint -v * pygtkchart.src: I: checking pygtkchart.src: I: checking-url http://notmyname.github.com/pygtkChart/ (timeout 10 seconds) pygtkchart.src: I: checking-url https://github.com/notmyname/pygtkChart/tarball/beta/notmyname-pygtkChart-beta-0-g8a56364.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) pygtkchart.noarch: I: checking pygtkchart.noarch: I: checking-url http://notmyname.github.com/pygtkChart/ (timeout 10 seconds) pygtkchart.spec: I: checking-url https://github.com/notmyname/pygtkChart/tarball/beta/notmyname-pygtkChart-beta-0-g8a56364.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. No issues. Would be nice to add a comment to the spec what the patch does.
Some things are still to be fixed: - The package seems to provide a pre-release as the tarball is tagged as beta. Thus, the Release field should look like this: 0.1.git%{git}%{?dist} http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages - Prefix the patch name with %{name}- or %{name}-%{version}- and, as Mario already mentioned, add a comment about what the patch does. - The package currently doesn't own %{_datadir}/%{name}/
* Sat May 21 2011 Fabian Affolter <fabian> - 0-0.2.gitg8a56364 - Fixed naming - Fixed directory ownership - Patch renamed and comment added Here are the updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pygtkchart.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pygtkchart-0-0.2.gitg8a56364.fc15.src.rpm
Here is the review: +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing MUST Items: [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. The sources (*.py) mention GPLv2+ (like the .spec), but the PKG-INFO ist just GPL. There is no COPYING-file, assuming the source is correct and the license is GPLv2+. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. > $ sha1sum notmyname-pygtkChart-beta-0-g8a56364.tar.gz SOURCES/notmyname-pygtkChart-beta-0-g8a56364.tar.gz > 4b638c53f86ece358621df72e2e0b3472fd626fb notmyname-pygtkChart-beta-0-g8a56364.tar.gz > 4b638c53f86ece358621df72e2e0b3472fd626fb SOURCES/notmyname-pygtkChart-beta-0-g8a56364.tar.gz [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. tested local mock (f14) and koji (f15): - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3111957 [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: [=] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3111957 [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [+] SHOULD: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Summary: All fine. Note that you have to contact upstream to include a COPYING file and have them update the PKG-INFO (Home-page and license) as well. Review passed and setting fedora-review+. Re-assigning to you (Fabian) now so that you can request fedora-cvs.
Thanks for the review, Niels. (In reply to comment #5) > Summary: > All fine. Note that you have to contact upstream to include a COPYING file and > have them update the PKG-INFO (Home-page and license) as well. https://github.com/notmyname/pygtkChart/issues/19 > Review passed and setting fedora-review+. Re-assigning to you (Fabian) now so > that you can request fedora-cvs. That's wrong. As far as I remember should the Review Request stay assined to the reviewer. I can change the flags without being assigned.
New Package VCS Request ======================= Package Name: pygtkchart Short Description: A GTK chart widget written in Python Owners: fab Branches: F14 F15 InitialCC:
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: pygtkchart Short Description: A GTK chart widget written in Python Owners: fab Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).