https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231215 Kalev Lember <klember@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |klember@xxxxxxxxxx CC| |klember@xxxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Kalev Lember <klember@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Taking for review. > Release: 1 This is missing the dist tag, 1%{?dist} > BuildRequires: python3-devel > BuildRequires: python3-setuptools A tiny nit: there's something wrong with whitespace and it doesn't align up with what comes before. I think maybe the rest uses tabs and there's a space here. > %description hub > Flatpak plugin for the Koji XMLRPC hub I think the convention is to use a full stop at the end of description sentences. > %files > %license COPYING > %doc README.md I wonder if it would be better to call this koji-flatpak-data or something? It could be a bit confusing if 'dnf install koji-flatpak' results in just a readme and license file. It would also work to have '%license COPYING' duplicated for all the subpackages and just get rid of the -data subpackage altogether. Not sure if it would be better that way or not :) Another question I have is about the plugin subpackage naming. As I understand it, koji-flatpak-hub is a plugin for koji-hub, koji-flatpak-builder is a plugin for koji-builder, and koji-flatpak-cli is a plugin for koji. If I look at the plugins shipped in the koji srpm, e.g. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2242604 they seem to use a bit different naming. How about something like this to have a bit of consistency with the existing plugins: koji-hub-plugin-flatpak instead of koji-flatpak-hub koji-builder-plugin-flatpak instead of koji-flatpak-builder python3-koji-cli-plugin-flatpak instead of koji-flatpak-cli What do you think? I really don't want to bikeshed over naming too much, just wanted to point that out quickly. None if this (with maybe the exception of the dist tag) is a review blocker in my opinion. -- 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=2231215 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231215%23c2 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
