Subject: Re: [bug#50740] [PATCH] gnu: Add wmname.

From: Sarah Morgensen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 16:50:04 -0700

Hi,

Sarah Morgensen <[email-masked]> writes:

>
> Though the license header *says* "MIT/X Consortium", the actual license
> text looks like expat to me [0].
>
> * Package review checklist (WIP)
> Lack of a check is not proof of noncompliance.
>
> 1. [ ] Package builds (guix build package)
>      [X] x86_64  [ ] aarch64  [ ] armhf     [ ] powerpc64le
>      [ ] i686    [ ] i586     [ ] mips64le
> 2. [ ] Build is reproducible (guix build --rounds=n package)
> 3. [ ] Tests enabled (if available) or disabled with in-source comment
> 4. [ ] No extraneous dependencies (guix size package)
> 5. [ ] No unnecessary pre-built binaries/blobs
> 6. [ ] Dependencies unvendored when available in Guix
> 7. [ ] Cross-compile friendly (cc-for-target, patches with inputs)
> 8. [ ] License matches source
> 9. [ ] No problematic lints (guix lint package)
> 10. [ ] Formatting follows guidelines
>     - [ ] Lines wrap at 80 characters
>     - [ ] Indentation passes etc/indent-code.el
>     - [ ] Two spaces used between sentences
>
> For new packages:
> 1. [ ] Source url is robust
>    * mirror:// used with url-fetch when possible
>    * No auto-generated archives from source repo (prefer cloning)
> 2. [ ] Synopsis is short, descriptive, and meaningful to a wide audience
> 3. [ ] Description is objective, takes 5-10 lines, uses full sentences,
>    and provides the information users need to decide whether the
>    software fits their needs.

Apologies for unintentionally including an empty copy of this.  I'm
still tweaking my Emacs bindings :)

--
Sarah