[Bug 1409884] Review Request: DayJournal - A digital journal that uses plain text files

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409884



--- Comment #4 from Brian Exelbierd <bex@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Hi Igor,

Thank you for the feedback.  It is extremely valuable.

> 1. I would recommend to change name of package to something in lower-case (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming#General_Naming)

Ahh.  I read "should" as meaning that projects that have formally upcased names
can have upcased packages.  This change will definitely make other lines
easier.

> 2. Missing BuildRequires: gcc (all BuildRequires must be specified)

Ok.  I has thought that allowing it to be brought in implicitly because vala
needs it was enough.  I'll fix this.

> 3. Since upstream uses pkg-config to find dependencies (PKG_CHECK_MODULES(DAYJOURNAL, gee-0.8
> [gtk+-3.0 libnotify appindicator3-0.1 gio-2.0 gdk-3.0 gtk+-3.0 glib-2.0])), it's worth to change style of BuildRequires:
> pkgconfig(gtk+-3.0)
> pkgconfig(libnotify)
> ...
> and remaining ones

This also makes sense.  If anyone comes after me and reads this, I think this
requirement is documented here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRequires_based_on_pkg-config

> 4. if you will rename package to dayjornal, then you can drop "-n ..." part in %autosetup -n dayjournal-%{version}
> 5. cp %{SOURCE1} . doesn't preserve timestamps (you can add `-a` to cp invocation)
> 6. make %{?_smp_mflags} -> %make_build (this is preferred because of some switches in parallel building inside RPM)

done.  I was able to eliminate the copies, see %install

> 7. install -m 644 -D dayjournal.desktop %{buildroot}/usr/share/applications/dayjournal.desktop
> 7.1. Add `-p` to preserve timestamps
> 7.2. Use %{name} instead of dayjornal if you will rename it
> 7.3. replace /usr/share with %{_datadir}

I missed %{_datadir} in my reading.  I should have searched more.

> 8. %make_install install-exec, is it really needed to specify install-exec?

In this case, I think so.  The install will, by default, install bunch of
zero-byte "documentation" files.  The patch I wrote eliminates those from the
build at the install-exec level.

> 9. /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/dayjournal-icon.png
> 9.1. same to replace /usr/share with %{_datadir}
> 9.2. I think having "-icon" is pointless

I updated to use the macro, however the icon was not getting picked up unless
named -icon.  I am not sure why.

> 10. You should run desktop-file-validate against desktop file in %check section

Based on my read of
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files I am
wondering if using desktop-file-install in %install isn't better.  Let me know.

> 11. License is GPLv3+, not GPLv3

fixed.

The spec file and SRPM have been uploaded to the same urls.  The COPR has been
updated as well.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




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