Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ruby-fam - Gamin/FAM bindings for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219732
kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |kevin@tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From kevin@tummy.com 2007-01-13 01:25 EST ------- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (BSD) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: ecc4bb28c44a3bcef9e423125a06bd09 fam-ruby-0.2.0.tar.gz ecc4bb28c44a3bcef9e423125a06bd09 fam-ruby-0.2.0.tar.gz.1 4ebdf619370f663d06015d680f0ae26f279676e3 fam-ruby-0.2.0.tar.gz 4ebdf619370f663d06015d680f0ae26f279676e3 fam-ruby-0.2.0.tar.gz.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
See below -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - No rpmlint output. See below - final provides and requires are sane:
SHOULD Items:
OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs See below - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version
Issues:
1. Should there really be a devel subpackage just for docs? If there does need to be one for some reason it should Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}, but I don't see a reason to have one, unless I am missing something...
2. Should the 'Requires: gamin' be needed? rpm already puts in a requires on libfam.so.0 which is provided by the gamin package.