[Bug 26] Review request: dvbcut - Clip and convert DVB transport streams to MPEG2 program streams

Wed Dec 31 15:29:02 CET 2008

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26

Andrea Musuruane <musuruan at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |musuruan at gmail.com
             Blocks|2                           |3
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #39 from Andrea Musuruane <musuruan at gmail.com>  2008-12-31 15:29:00 ---
Here is the review:

 +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing, N:not applicable.

MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
        Output is clean.
[-] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
        Use an %{alphatag} beginning with the date in YYYYMMDD format 
        (this is OK) and followed by up to 16 (ASCII) alphanumeric characters 
        of your choosing (this is not OK). For example: 20081218svn. See:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[=] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
        No problem because this is RPM Fusion.
[-] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
        README.icons say that icons are under LGPLv2
        Source files says licences is GPLv2+
        Therefore licence must be GPLv2+ and LGPLv2, See:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios
        http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses_3
[+] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] 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.
        dvbcut-snapshot.sh doesn't seem to work. Maybe instructions are wrong
        or not detailed. I get cannot connect to server error.
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
        Tested on F10/x86_64.
[+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[N] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
[N] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[N] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review
[+] 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.
        In the %files section use either dvbcut or %{name} not both.
[=] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
        This is not a problem since we are in RPM Fusion.
[N] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[N] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[N] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[N] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[N] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[N] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release} 
[N] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[+] 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:
[N] 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.
[N] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
        Tested on F10/x86_64
[N] 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: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[N] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[N] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and
this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg.
A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not
installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb.
[N] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
[=] SHOULD: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
        Timestamps are not preserved using the original makefile. This should
        be patched.

NEEDSWORK

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.