When I iniatially submitted GAP and some of its packages as Fedora packages, I followed what Debian was doing at the time. I think we can do a few things a little better now. One way is to stop translating the GAP package names into human readable form, and just use the upstream names. Rather than being convenient, those renames are just confusing people. Also, now that we have weak dependencies in RPM, we can follow upstream's dependency chains a little more closely. The result is that I need to rename a handful of packages, and introduce a few more. In particular, I need reviews for the following: 1. gap-pkg-atlasrep: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185014 2. gap-pkg-browse: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185015 3. gap-pkg-io: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185016 4. gap-pkg-polymaking: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185017 5. gap-pkg-sonata: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185018 6. gap-pkg-tomlib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185019 7. gap-pkg-ctbllib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185020 8. gap-pkg-spinsym: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185021 Reviews 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are rename reviews; 1, 4, and 8 are new packages. The first 5 packages can be reviewed without delay. Review 6 (tomlib) depends on review 1 (atlasrep). Review 7 (ctbllib) depends on reviews 2 (browse) and 6 (tomlib). Review 8 (spinsym) depends on review 7 (ctbllib). For the renamed packages, here are the original reviews for reference: 2. gap-pkg-browse: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869797 3. gap-pkg-io: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858287 5. gap-pkg-sonata: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858081 6. gap-pkg-tomlib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769450 7. gap-pkg-ctbllib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785903 The way this works upstream for noarch packages is that the package tarballs are simply unpacked into the GAP package directory (/usr/lib/gap/pkg in Fedora). Hence, these spec files tend to do something similar, with the exception that we try to remove a few files that aren't actually needed at runtime. Some surprising files are needed at runtime, so I'm not as aggressive about this as some reviewers may expect. For example, the test code in a tst subdirectory can be invoked from inside GAP, and GAP has its own documentation viewer for the contents of doc subdirectories, so both of those go into the main package. Please let me know what I can review for you in exchange. Thank you. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
