https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1708719 Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Have started reviewing this. To start with, the %{vector_version} macro should not be necessary - instead just use %{version}. Also, the Release: line should use the dist macro, something like Release: 0.1.beta.1%{?dist}, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag Normally a snapshot release would include the git HEAD commit id, but since the upstream v2.0.0 release is imminent, we wont bother. Also, Source1 is not a webpack, it's a tarball of (locally npm installed) node_modules, and it's huge compared to the built webpack files shipped in the binary RPM. Is there any way the tests can use a webpack too, so we could avoid bundling all of those node modules into a whopping 50MB tarball? Also I think you should specify the following (despite this being a noarch package), as we discussed earlier : ExclusiveArch: %{nodejs_arches} This is because the node interpreter isn't available on some arch/dist combinations, so Fedora builds would avoid them. I have more comments, but will post them later Cheers -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
