[Bug 576685] Review Request: pekwm - A small and flexible window manager

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=576685

--- Comment #8 from Germán Racca <gracca@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-26 14:30:55 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)

Hi Christoph, thanks once again for your careful review. Please find the
updated files here:

Spec URL: http://sites.google.com/site/gracca/pekwm.spec
SRPM URL: http://sites.google.com/site/gracca/pekwm-0.1.12-2.fc12.src.rpm

In response to your comments:

>     - patch-not-applied should be fixed. You are applying the patch with 
>         patch -p0 < %{PATCH0}
>       but rpm already has a marco for that called %patch. Use
>         %patch0 
>       or 
>         %patch0 -p0
>       or even better
>          %patch0 -p0 -b .orig
>       I recommend doing backups if you apply several patches. Use the name of
>       the patch as backup extension.

OK, patch applied correctly and with backup option.

> FIX - MUST: the package is not named according to the Package Naming
> Guidelines. The disttag is missing, see
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag
> (Sorry I didn't catch this before)

OK, fixed. I used %{?dist} tag.

> The contrib directory contains two scripts that are not needed for pekwm to
> operate, nevertheless they are part of the source and they are useful. Thus it
> might be a good idea to ship them. If people are really low on disk space can
> install pekwm with --excludedocs and don't get the scripts.
> 
> As the scripts require manual configuration, we cannot install them directly.
> People will be disappointed/confused because they don't work out of the box. By
> shipping them as doc we make sure that people actually look at them and the
> README file before the use them.
> 
> When we ship the scripts we don't want to add additional dependencies (e.g. one
> script needs zenity). Docs must never be executable because rpm will add a
> dependency on sh or whatever interpreter is needed for the scripts (in this
> case perl).

Now I see your point. I've included the whole contrib folder to the %doc
section. Before doing this, I removed exec permissions to perl scripts. But I'm
not sure if the way I did this is the correct one.

> Germán, please fix the %patch thing and the disttag and read
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group
> so I can approve this package and sponsor you. If you are doing a pre-review,
> please CC me.

I've read it yet, but I didn't realize of adding you to my pre-reviews. Here
are the bugs I've participated:

566598 Review Request: cover-thumbnailer - Display music cover and more in
nautilus

576023 Review Request: libwebcam - user-space configuration of the uvcvideo
driver

577975 Review Request: kde-plasma-daisy - A versatile application launcher

578269 Review Request: xgospel - An X11 client for Internet Go Server

581216 Review Request: texworks - A simple IDE for authoring TeX documents

581509 Review Request: yacas - easy to use, general purpose Computer Algebra
System

584111 Review Request: cmatrix - Simulate the display from "The Matrix"


Hope this package be approved soon!

Cheers,
Germán

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review


[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]