Bug 1006295
Summary: | Review Request: libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment - a network equipment shape gallery for LibreOffice | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | David Tardon <dtardon> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Antonio T. (sagitter) <anto.trande> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | anto.trande, dtardon, duffy, notting |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | anto.trande:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-09-18 12:43:03 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
David Tardon
2013-09-10 11:59:23 UTC
Hi David. I propose to you another review swap. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996222 What do you say ? :) I say yes, but I probably will not have time to do it before weekend, so do not be surprised if nothing happens for a couple of days. Honestly, I have some doubts about LibreOffice extensions packaging since don't exist any complete packaging instructions, unless we can follow those relative to OpenOffice (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:OpenOffice.orgExtensions). This package is moderately simple, maybe %post/%postun scriptlets could perfect the management of this extension. (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #3) > Honestly, I have some doubts about LibreOffice extensions packaging since > don't exist any complete packaging instructions, unless we can follow those > relative to OpenOffice > (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:OpenOffice.orgExtensions). This page is obsolete. It was created before the introduction of bundled extensions. These are registered automatically for a user at the start of the application, as opposed to shared extensions, which must be registered globally at installation time by the unopkg tool. All that is needed is to unpack the extension to the right directory. > > This package is moderately simple, maybe %post/%postun scriptlets could > perfect the management of this extension. No, there is no need for scriptlets. In short: this extension must be simply put in a dedicated directory of /%{_libdir}/libreoffice/share/extensions and includes both 'license' and 'release-note' files. Since there is no any clear guideline for LibreOffice extension, there is no reason to request any additional change to this package. I'll wait a little time before to approve this package in order to know some possible opinions from other packagers. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. Note: Cannot find cc-by-sa-3.0.txt in rpm(s) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text License file is included in .odx extention. - Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/extensions, /usr/lib/libreoffice, /usr/lib/libreoffice/share These directories are owned by libreoffice-core package. ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/libreoffice, /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/extensions, /usr/lib/libreoffice/share [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/extensions, /usr/lib/libreoffice, /usr/lib/libreoffice/share [-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [-]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment-1.0.3-1.fc21.i686.rpm libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment-1.0.3-1.fc21.src.rpm libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: E: explicit-lib-dependency libreoffice-core libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fibre -> fiber, fire, fib re libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: E: no-binary libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: W: no-documentation libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fibre -> fiber, fire, fib re 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: E: explicit-lib-dependency libreoffice-core libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fibre -> fiber, fire, fib re libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: E: no-binary libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment.i686: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libreoffice-core Provides -------- libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment: libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment(x86-32) Source checksums ---------------- http://www.vrt.com.au/sites/default/files/download/VRTnetworkequipment_1.0.3.oxt : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 8005ff6182ccf051e20191286b6d16b61c12c3d891ab313543cd1b37722df57c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8005ff6182ccf051e20191286b6d16b61c12c3d891ab313543cd1b37722df57c Generated by fedora-review 0.5.0 (920221d) last change: 2013-08-30 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-i386 -b 1006295 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, SugarActivity, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EPEL5, EXARCH, DISTTAG > I'll wait a little time before to approve this package in order to know some
> possible opinions from other packagers.
Package approved.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: libreoffice-gallery-vrt-network-equipment Short Description: A network equipment shape gallery for LibreOffice Owners: dtardon caolanm Branches: f19 f20 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). |