Bug 207607

Summary: Review Request: telepathy-butterfly - MSN connection manager for Telepathy
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Brian Pepple <bdpepple>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Sander Hoentjen <sander>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhide   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-10-02 16:09:14 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
Bug Depends On: 207173    
Bug Blocks: 163779, 205343    

Description Brian Pepple 2006-09-21 20:26:43 UTC
Spec URL: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-butterfly.spec
SRPM URL: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-butterfly-0.1.0-1.src.rpm
Description: An MSN connection manager for Telepathy that handles presence, personal messages, and conversations


1. This package needs a filesystem package for telepathy to handle ownership of the connection managers directory, since there will be many connection managers in the future.  See below for the spec file for this package.
2. Targetted for FC6.  To build on FC5 it will need to be patched to find the correct directory for the dbus service file.

Spec URL: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-filesystem.spec
SRPM: http://piedmont.homelinux.org/fedora/telepathy/telepathy-filesystem-0.0.1-1.src.rpm

Comment 1 Sander Hoentjen 2006-09-29 08:51:13 UTC
can you switch telepathy-filesystem to noarch?

Comment 2 Brian Pepple 2006-09-29 12:34:49 UTC
Yeah, I can make the filesystem a noarch package.

Comment 3 Sander Hoentjen 2006-09-29 14:05:56 UTC
ok, once you do that the filesystem package is APPROVED
I will give a review on butterfly soon

Comment 4 Sander Hoentjen 2006-10-01 09:33:47 UTC


- rpmlint checks return with no output
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on mock devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file


Comment 5 Brian Pepple 2006-10-02 16:09:14 UTC
Thanks for the review.