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: buildbot


           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |

------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-08-12 22:13 EST -------
Well, the python guidelines have been changed to get rid of the "ghost the .pyo
files" bit.  So your files section should shrink a bit.  (In any case, you
didn't ghost the .pyo files in the contrib directory.)

This builds fine in mock; rpmlint has the following to say about the SRPM:

W: buildbot mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs
  You use spaces everywhere except for Patch0: and BuildArch:.  Not a really big

There are many subdirectories under python_sitelyb/buildbot that you don't own.
 Getting rid of the %ghost bits should fix this as well.

There's something that looks like a test suite in buildbot/test.  Is this
something that could be run at package build time?  Should it really be included
with the installed package?

* source files match upstream:
   7be16fe13f173e46df711ed51648e750  buildbot-0.7.3.tar.gz
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
X rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   buildbot = 0.7.3-3.fc6
   python(abi) = 2.4
   python-twisted >= 1.3.0
? %check is not present but there might be a test suite.
* package is not relocatable.
X owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Fedora-package-review mailing list

Reply via email to