Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at
Bug 196793 (php-pear-MDB2) - Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - Database Abstraction Layer
Summary: Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - Database Abstraction Layer
Alias: php-pear-MDB2
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Remi Collet
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
Depends On: 196802
Blocks: FE-ACCEPT php-pear-Log
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2006-06-27 01:15 UTC by Christopher Stone
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2006-09-06 22:16:19 UTC
Type: ---
jwboyer: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Christopher Stone 2006-06-27 01:15:33 UTC
Spec URL:

PEAR::MDB2 is a merge of the PEAR::DB and Metabase php database abstraction

It provides a common API for all supported RDBMS. The main difference to most
other DB abstraction packages is that MDB2 goes much further to ensure

Comment 1 Brandon Holbrook 2006-06-29 02:15:32 UTC
+ No rpmlint output
+ name OK
+ meets packaging guidelines
+ BSD license, not included
+ spec in legible American English
+ source matches upstream
fc452e0e48c2ad67ca8e0af41c462535  MDB2-2.1.0.tgz
+ builds on FC5 i386
+ appropriate BuildRequires
+ no locales
+ no shared libraries
+ not relocatable
+ does not create directories
+ no duplicate %files
+ OK permissions
+ OK %clean section
+ consistent macros
+ OK code / content
+ no large documentation
+ benign %docs
+ no header files or static libraries
+ no pkgconfig
+ no .so libraries
+ no devel package
+ no .la files
+ no GUI
+ does not share files or directories with others

- does NOT include license from upstream

Approved, IMHO, though including a BSD license would be nice :)  Also, I can't
officially change the status to FE-ACCEPT, somebody else will have to do that.

Comment 2 Christopher Stone 2006-06-29 02:18:16 UTC
I asked tibbs to look into sponsering you last night, I'll nudge him again
tonight and see if he can get you to approve this package for me. 

Thanks for the review!

Comment 3 Brandon Holbrook 2006-06-29 02:21:16 UTC

One last thing I forgot to mention, %build is empty, and should probably just be
removed altogether... but not a showstopper

Comment 4 Christopher Stone 2006-06-29 06:34:32 UTC
I have updated the spec file to remove the %build, the only reference to a
license I could find was on which just links to
a license template.  I could not find any reference to an actual license at the
packages external home page

Comment 5 Christopher Stone 2006-06-29 06:40:04 UTC
ah nevermind, the license is at the top of the source files, so it is already
included in every file.  I can cut&paste one of these text files for the license.

Comment 6 Christopher Stone 2006-06-29 06:53:33 UTC
Spec URL:

* Wed Jun 28 2006 Christopher Stone <chris.stone> 2.1.0-2
- Remove %%build section since it is not used
- Add LICENSE to %%doc

Comment 7 Christopher Stone 2006-06-29 07:26:09 UTC
Hey, I have put up another version here:

The main difference is that it puts the documentation in both the Fedora
standard location AND the pear standard location.

The result is a much cleaner looking spec file, tell me what you think.

Comment 8 Ville Skyttä 2006-06-29 08:53:11 UTC
I can't access the specfile URL at the moment to check, but note that especially
if this is not a noarch package, removing the %build section (even if it's
empty) is not a good idea, see bug 192422.  Even if it is noarch, I'd recommend
keeping it to avoid similar nasty surprises in the future.

Comment 9 Christopher Stone 2006-06-29 09:06:59 UTC
It's noarch

Comment 10 Christopher Stone 2006-09-04 01:05:52 UTC
Update SPEC file and SRPM to match latest template


Comment 11 Remi Collet 2006-09-04 17:11:25 UTC
rpmlint is ok.
build in mock succed.

should not you upgrade to latest upstream version (2.2.2 stable) before release it ?

Requires php version is 4.3.2.

I think i could(will) do the review for you.

Comment 12 Christopher Stone 2006-09-04 20:51:37 UTC
Yes you are correct, I need to upgrade to 2.2.2

There are still a couple little things being ironed out on the template php
spec, see

I'll do an upgrade in the next day or two with these changes for you to formally
review.  Then we can get php-pear-Log out.

Discussions on Fedora packaging mailing list led to the agreement that if the
package requires a php version of < 5.x then it's not needed because no
supported Fedora distributions use a php version older than this.

Comment 13 Christopher Stone 2006-09-06 18:02:54 UTC

* Wed Sep 06 2006 Christopher Stone <chris.stone> 2.2.2-1
- Upstream sync
- Update spec to latest template

Comment 14 Remi Collet 2006-09-06 20:22:29 UTC
Can't assign this bug to myself for the moment.
Will do the review ASAP.

Comment 15 Remi Collet 2006-09-06 21:44:36 UTC
Build and install fine on FC5.
rpmlint is ok.
previous version build in mock (mock broken for me on this moment).
all MUST items are OK.
Great job done on this template.

I also though "including a BSD license would be nice :)" but i never find one
good copy.


Comment 16 Christopher Stone 2007-04-24 00:22:07 UTC
Branch Package CVS Request
Package Name: php-pear-MDB2
Short Description: Database Abstraction Layer
Owners: chris.stone
Branches: EL-5

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