https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2313339 --- Comment #7 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Thomas Fitzsimmons from comment #6) > Here are a bunch of my initial thoughts: > > - I don't know if the EPL applies to six lines of configuration. It seems > weird to put any license on this. The temurins are EPL2. The repo maybe not. If that is case (and it seem avarage licence of repository packages in fedora is MIT). then I will switch to MIT. But there must be license. > > - "To ensure this, repository files must initially include the enabled=0 (or > equivalent) setting, and the user must explicitly enable third-party > repositories to install from them. FESCo may grant an exception to waive > this requirement." > > I think you should apply to FESCo to have the Temurin repository enabled by > default; the repos contain entirely Free Software (correct me if I am wrong > here), and current users are used to "dnf install java-1.8.0-openjdk". Yup. I will be elaborating on it with them . I will be glad if it ends up with enabled=1. But for now, and for case of f41 and older port of this package, the zero should stay. (unless the exception is granted before this being approved) > > - As I mentioned in email, I would like to see Temurin use the > "java-1.8.0-temurin" naming scheme. Are aliases (somewhere, not sure where) > an option, such that "dnf install java-1.8.0-openjdk" maps to Temurin's > equivalent 1.8.0 package? That is issue we have tor rise in https://github.com/adoptium/installer/issues/ I think it can start with virtual provides. The rename may be quite conmplicated for them. But virtual provide is no issue. Added to https://github.com/adoptium/installer/issues/848#issuecomment-2133516101 and created https://github.com/adoptium/installer/issues/1008 > > - I don't typically like whitespace-aligning the fields in the header, > because the alignment hard to maintain; either things drift out of alignment > as fields are added or removed, or whitespace-only changes to the entire > header are necessary to maintain alignment, which clutter history. Will try to do. Thanx! > > - Can you please use capitals where appropriate in the Summary line? Will try to do. Thanx! > > - The Summary should be more descriptive. For example: > > $ rpm -qi fedora-repos-38-1.noarch|tail -n2 > Description : > Fedora package repository files for yum and dnf along with gpg public keys. Thanx. Will use. > > - Can you please clarify this comment? I think it is too vague: > > # except tool owns also fedora-third-party/conf.d/ > Requires: fedora-third-party > > and it's a nit pick, but can you make comments start with a capital and take > the form of a full sentence? eg: # fedora-third-party contains tools to work with 3rd party repos and owns fedora-third-party/conf.d/ directory ? > > - I would probably just inline these and eliminate the extra two lines to > set variables. > > %global repodir yum.repos.d > %global thirdparty lib/fedora-third-party/conf.d > > Either that or go all the way: > > %global thirdparty %{_prefix}/lib/fedora-third-party/conf.d/ > %global repodir %{_sysconfdir}/yum.repos.d > > but... just inline them. Especially those are dirs I do not trust so I would liek to keep them as macros. ok. If you like, I will use full paths as you suggests. > > - What does lib/fedora-third-party/conf.d do? It is not referenced in the > upstream instructions. (I am only looking at the spec file so far, have not > attempted reverse-engineering behaviours based on the contents of the SRPM) I was advised to include it as you see it during original Fesco discussion. TBH, I'm not sure I understand its usage too. > > - The description needs a lot of work. I don't like having to click the URL > to see the package's entire contents to know what it does. Can you try > rephrasing it? I will do my best, but feel free to advice. > > - Can you get rid of all the extra newlines? It is too hard to maintain > double-spacing consistently, so only ever use one blank line (maximum) to > separate sections. Sure. All the double ones are error. > > - Is there a Fedora packaging style guide for how to format RPM changelog > entries? Should they start with a capital, for example? Nope. But thanx for hint. Will use auto chanmgelog and auto release (eg https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/mkoncek/rpms/java-runtime-decompiler/c/8cffe2fa212881a2936ac2cdf01b9a5b18f472b1 , only without that extra file) TYVVM! -- 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=2313339 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202313339%23c7 -- _______________________________________________ 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
