Christoph Wickert wrote:
> * Recently I updated some of the Xfce 4.6 packages. One of
them
> was approved without _any_ docs.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477732
also all the desktop files were installed and listed in %files twice and
if the reviewer had tested the package he would have noticed that. Site
note: The reviewer has been made a sponsor 2 weeks later.
s/he/she/ ;-)
Not that it really matters, I'm just being pedantic. ;-)
As for the complaint, no docs are certainly not ideal, but it's not what is
going to break the distribution either... But yes, reviewers should catch
this.
> > * A package was approved with more then 19 missing
deps on
> > binaries.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459535
That one sounds like a valid complaint.
> > * A font package was approved although it contained
another font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481501
In this case the reviewer clearly said what needs to be fixed and the
version which got imported was fixed, so it wasn't that bad. Maybe it would
have made more sense to wait for a fixed version, but are there actually
any issues with what was imported?
Do RH employes have sponsors too? A lot of the bad reviews are done
by
RH people and a lot of bad specs come from RH folks.
In the case of #459535, neither the original reviewer (before you rejected
his review and rereviewed it) nor the people who commented before were RH
employees. The reviewer in #481501 wasn't from Red Hat either. You can't
just blame it all on RH employees.
Somebody pointed me
to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433678
and I had a quick glance over it before Andreas added his comments:
* no list of tests that have been run
Bad.
* SourceURL is missing
* I can't even find the source because URL is wrong
Very bad.
* without the source you cannot check the License tag, md5, etc
You could check the License by extracting the source from the SRPM. But it's
pretty likely that wasn't done here.
* docs not marked %doc
RPM marks files in some directories as %doc automatically, AFAIK %{_docdir}
is one of those.
Kevin Kofler