Bug 711181 - Review Request: mono-reflection - Helper library for Mono Reflection support
Summary: Review Request: mono-reflection - Helper library for Mono Reflection support
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Christian Krause
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-06-06 18:12 UTC by Tom "spot" Callaway
Modified: 2011-08-08 19:38 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-08-08 19:38:52 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
chkr: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-06-06 18:12:19 UTC
Spec URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/mono-reflection.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/mono-reflection-0.1-0.1.201105123git04d1df.fc15.src.rpm
Koji Scratch Build (dist-f15): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3113768
Description: 
Helper library for Mono Reflection support.

Packager Note:
This is a necessary dependency for the latest db4o package update.

Comment 1 Christian Krause 2011-06-07 22:13:03 UTC
Here is the full review of the package:

* rpmlint: OK
rpmlint RPMS/i686/mono-reflection-* SRPMS/mono-reflection-0.1-0.1.201105123git04d1df.fc15.src.rpm SPECS/mono-reflection.spec
mono-reflection.i686: E: no-binary
mono-reflection.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib

-> false positives (mono assemblies are supposed to be in %{_libdir} and they are not recognized as (ELF) binaries)

mono-reflection-devel.i686: W: no-documentation

-> OK, package does not ship any further API documentation

mono-reflection.src: W: invalid-url Source0: mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2
SPECS/mono-reflection.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2

-> OK, source obtained via VCS

3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.


* naming: OK
- spec file name matches package name
- the upstream name is "mono.reflection"
- however, according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Separators the separator for name
parts should be "-" so the chosen name is OK


* sources: TODO
- Source0 tag ok
- spectool -g does not work, which is OK for VCS checkouts
- I followed exactly the steps from the spec file to create the source tarball, but I get a source package with another md5sum:
chkr: b68ba65fbc6ed8db9cf1feea31a1b694  mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2
spot: 49c3f06edbdb02c5cb4454645824fc15  mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2
- actually the sources itself match, but the .git directory doesn't which causes the different md5sums
- however, there are two problems here:
a) .git is packaged
b) the steps to re-create the tarball are not referring to a specific revision
For my packages I have usually added a small script which creates a "normal" tarball (without any VCS directories) from a specific revision/commit:

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=banshee.git;a=blob;f=banshee-make-git-snapshot.sh;h=24847e5154b556bb11e51b2564410fc75d538ddb;hb=HEAD

The comment in the spec file is then reduced to something like this:
"# sh banshee-make-git-snapshot.sh <gitcommit> <gitdate>"

This will ensure that it is always possible to re-create exactly the same tarball.


* binaries in upstream sources: TODO
- although it is not used during compilation, there is one pre-compiled C# assembly:
mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df/Test/target.dll
- just to be sure I would delete it in %prep


* License: OK
- MIT is a Fedora approved License
- License in spec file match the actual license (as mentioned in the source files)
- Probably you could ask upstream to include a license file.


* spec file written in American English and legible: OK

* compilation: OK
- builds fine in koji: F16/rawhide


* BuildRequires: OK

* Requires: TODO
- the -devel package should use the fully versioned arch-specific dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}


* bundled copies of system libraries: OK (n/a)

* locales handling: OK (n/a)

* ldconfig in %post and %postun: OK (n/a)

* package owns all directories that it creates: OK

* %files section: OK

* no files listed twice in %files: OK

* file permissions: OK

* macro usage: OK

* code vs. content: OK (no content)

* main package should not contain development related parts: OK 

* large documentation into subpackage: OK (n/a)

* header files in -devel subpackage: OK (n/a)

* static libraries in -static package: OK (n/a)

* *.so link in -devel package: OK (n/a)

* devel package requires base package using fully versioned dependency: OK

* packages must not contain *.la files: OK (n/a)

* GUI applications must provide *.desktop file: OK (n/a)

* packages must not own files/dirs already owned by other packages: OK

* all filenames UTF-8: OK

* debuginfo sub-package: OK (n/a)


Summary of the open issues:
- better (reproducible) creation of the tarball from git repository
- deleting all pre-compiled binaries/assemblies in %prep
- use of fully versioned dependency in Requires:

Comment 3 Christian Krause 2011-06-14 21:42:20 UTC
Thanks for the new package, I have verified that all mentioned issues are fixed now -> APPROVED

Comment 4 Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-06-15 19:55:20 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: mono-reflection
Short Description: Helper library for Mono Reflection support
Owners: spot
Branches: f14 f15
InitialCC:

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-06-15 20:01:36 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 6 Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-08 19:38:52 UTC
This guy is in F-15 and F-16. Closing.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.