https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1998270 --- Comment #11 from Kalev Lember <klember@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > Version: %{majorver}.%{minorver}.%{patchver} This is not a review blocker, but any chance you could just spell it out as "Version: 5.2.0"? We have some automation scripts that I use for GNOME package mass updates that would break if it's split up like this. I am the one who's been handling the GNOME mass updates recently but amigadave is going to take over for the next cycle. I would keep majorver as a global though, but maybe rename it to api_ver or something like that, as that would make it easier to bump from gtksourceview 5 to gtksourceview 6 in the future. What do you think? > %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/GtkSource-%{majorver}.typelib The directory ownership here is incorrect. You need to make sure that %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0 directory itself is included in the package's list of files: otherwise when the package is removed it leaves behind the empty directory. You could do it in two ways, either explicitly listing the directory: %dir %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0 %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/GtkSource-%{majorver}.typelib or recursively list both the directory and its contents: %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/ Which one of these to use is just a style question. This and other gir directories might get added to a filesystem package in the future (there's an open FPC ticket about this), but as of right now we need to be explicit to make sure they are listed correctly. > %{_datadir}/gir-1.0/GtkSource-%{majorver}.gir Same thing here: Need to make sure %{_datadir}/gir-1.0 directory is listed in the files list. > %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/* ... and here: %{_datadir}/gtk-doc and %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html directories need to be listed in the files list. Beyond these nitpicks, it all looks nice and clean to me -- thanks for packaging it up! I don't see any other issues and it's just a new parallel-installable version of the existing gtksourceview4 package so I'd be happy to review+ this if you can fix the nits above. Do you need a sponsor for the packaging group, by the way? I can help with that if you need it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1998270 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
