Bug 1196827
| Summary: | Review Request: postbooks - PostgreSQL-based accounting and ERP suite, Qt-based desktop version | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Daniel Pocock <daniel> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | gmoskowitz, jake.b.holcombe, package-review, samuel-rhbugs, zbyszek |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | zbyszek:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | postbooks-4.8.2-1.fc22 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2015-06-27 18:16:44 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | 1196780, 1196782 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Daniel Pocock
2015-02-26 20:44:01 UTC
I've created a pull request for the upstream developers to accept the spec file in their repository: https://github.com/xtuple/qt-client/pull/613 It'd be nice to have Requires on separate lines, especially for the ones with %{?...} variables. This applied to all three reviews.
Why is ldconfig in the %post for main package?
%clean can be removed.
rm at the begininng of %install looks strange.
All three specs look great...
https://github.com/xtuple/qt-client/pull/684 addressing review comments has been merged Spec URL: https://secure.trendhosting.net/fedora/fedora/postbooks.spec SRPM URL: https://secure.trendhosting.net/fedora/postbooks-4.8.1-1.fc21.src.rpm Thanks all, the specs and new src RPM URLs have been added Latest SRPM: Spec URL: https://secure.trendhosting.net/fedora/fedora/postbooks.spec SRPM URL: https://secure.trendhosting.net/fedora/postbooks-4.8.2-1.fc21.src.rpm Note: upstream hasn't actually tagged 4.8.2 yet, but the desktop file is in his repository so the SRPM has been built from a snapshot of the 4_8_x branch. Upstream will probably tag 4.8.2 if there are no other changes requested for Fedora to approve the package. Issues: This package should have an appdata file [1]. It's not mandatory, just strongly encouraged, but I think it would be really nice for postbooks to show up prominently in gnome software. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData postbooks-libs hath no license. The same as in other packages: - xpm is deprecated and the icon is awfully small. - /usr/share/applications/postbooks.desktop: warning: key "Encoding" in group "Desktop Entry" is deprecated Apart from that, things seem mostly kosher. rpmlint: postbooks.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) xTuple -> sextuplet postbooks.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C xTuple Accounting/ERP suite desktop client postbooks.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xTuple -> sextuplet postbooks.src:77: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} postbooks.src:78: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} postbooks.src:78: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir} postbooks.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://github.com/xtuple/qt-client/archive/v4.8.2.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. postbooks.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) xTuple -> sextuplet postbooks.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C xTuple Accounting/ERP suite desktop client postbooks.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xTuple -> sextuplet postbooks.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.8.1-1 ['4.8.2-1.fc22', '4.8.2-1'] postbooks.x86_64: W: no-documentation postbooks.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xtuple postbooks.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary postbooks postbooks-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xTuple -> sextuplet postbooks-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpostbooks -> pocketbooks postbooks-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libxtuplecommon.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libQtXmlPatterns.so.4 postbooks-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libxtuplecommon.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libpthread.so.0 postbooks-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libxtuplecommon.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 postbooks-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation All ignorable. The SRPM has been updated again: Spec URL: https://secure.trendhosting.net/fedora/fedora/postbooks.spec SRPM URL: https://secure.trendhosting.net/fedora/postbooks-4.8.2-1.fc21.src.rpm Still there:
> postbooks-libs hath no license.
Please fix that.
Apart from the above, no issues. Package is APPROVED.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: postbooks Short Description: Postbooks multi-user accounting, CRM and ERP suite Upstream URL: https://github.com/xtuple/qt-client Owners: pocock Branches: f20 f21 f22 el6 epel7 Git done (by process-git-requests). So, what's the status here? Would be great to do the last step and put the package in the hands of users :) Updates were pushed for fc20, fc21 and fc22: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/postbooks Is any further action needed for these versions or for it to appear in Fedora 23? Ah, OK. The review bug number is normally added to the newpackage update, so the review bug is automatically closed when it goes stable. So no, everything is OK, I just didn't know about the updates. |