Bug 1317282

This is my first submit, I am new to packaging and need a sponsor. :)
Please also add me to the FAS packager group.

The SRPM builds successfully in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13335208

Fedora compiler flags are not used and the build is not verbose.

The license file is not included, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines

Desktop files must be validated: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage

Thank you for your suggestions, Volker.

I have changed my spec file accordingly. Unfortunately, the 0.9 upstream release 1) does not comply with freedesktop specifications and 2) fails to compile when building with the Fedora CFLAGS.

However, both issues are fixed in the current git branch. Since I don't want to build the package of the git branch for stability's sake, I have asked the upstream developer to release an update (0.9.1 or 1.0).

I will comment again when upstream responds or when there is any other progress. Thanks again for your help.

I have contacted upstream and the developer has released bspwm-0.9.1, which fixes the problems mentioned in my previous comment.

Spec URL: https://pidgornyy.fedorapeople.org/review/bspwm/0.9.1-1/bspwm.spec

SRPM URL: https://pidgornyy.fedorapeople.org/review/bspwm/0.9.1-1/bspwm-0.9.1-1.fc23.src.rpm

- Updated to 0.9.1
- I have added the CFLAGS to make
- The build process is now verbose
- I have changed the commit message to begin with a capital letter, as that is the style I have found in many existing Fedora spec files
- $RPM_BUILD_ROOT has been replaced with %{buildroot} for consistency
- debuginfo is not ignored anymore

I have no rpmlint complains except for spelling.

The SRPM builds successfully in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13355149

Some additional changes which I forgot to mention:

- The desktop file is now being validated
- The license is now included

Any progress on this, Volker?

The rpmlint output can be found here, by the way:
https://paste.fedoraproject.org/343345/raw/

Sorry for the delay!

You don't need to rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install, that's done by default on every version of RPM (except the one in RHEL 5).

Otherwise, your package is clean. Please fix that before you commit.

== REVIEW ==

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:
bspwm.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bspc -> tbsp
bspwm.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sxhkd 
bspwm.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sxhkd

All safe to ignore.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (BSD) OK, text in %license, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on Fedora 24 (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- .desktop file properly handled

I've also just sponsored you into the packager group. Remember, with great power comes great responsibility.

You can continue your journey from this step:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner

Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/bspwm

ping?

pong.

Package is up for Rawhide and F25: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/bspwm

Sorry it took so long, I pong-ed Igor over private message but forgot to close the needinfo here at Bugzilla.

Closing this as NEXTRELEASE, bspwm is going to be available in Fedora 25 and up.