Bug 1348932

We have this process http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group to get sponsored into the packager group. Can you either submit few more packages and/or some full detailed package reviews? This is needed to make sure package submitter understands the rpm packaging well and follows the fedora packaging guidelines.

Please go through the following links
1) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process

2) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines

3) To find the packages already submitted for review, check http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/

4) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Reviewer is useful while doing package reviews.

5) https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/ this is fedora-review tool to help review packages in fedora. You need to use this and do un-official package reviews of packages submitted by other contributors. While doing so mention "This is un-official review of the package." at top of your review comment.

Good to review packages listed in http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html

When you do full package review of some packages, provide that review comment link here so that I can look how you have reviewed those packages.

If you got any questions please ask :)

Hello, I will take your review request, firt than all please fix the SPEC and SRPM links, it is fine to link to a copr build but please use the correct URL for the spec and srpm link.

Will be nice to see you do some informal reviews, while not mandatory is really usefull to see if a candidate is already motivated to become a package maintaier and also helps to see if you a proper undestand of Fedora Packaging Guidelines.

Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ksinkar/bash-git-prompt/master/bash-git-prompt.spec

SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/ksinkar/prelude/fedora-23-x86_64/00365282-bash-git-prompt/bash-git-prompt-2.5.1-1.fc23.src.rpm

The above are the updated URLs. I hope I do not have repeat the description information. I have read through the packaging guidelines and am looking at projects where I can do informal reviews. Will update this feed, of the reviews, once I do them.

Hi, just a few comments:

1. Al new packages must go to rawhide, I hace just fixed the tag.

2. There is no need of %%clean seption at less than you want  to go to epel 6 or epel 5, also you must remove the rm -rf %{buildroot} command in the begginig of %install.

3. Add ad comment to the %build section to avoid a rmplint issue about ampy %%buil

4. The url tag shuld be https://github.com/magicmonty/bash-git-prompt
without the .git

5. There is not problem with use a already existing spec but update the changelog:

Fri Aug 08 2014 Justin Zhang <schnell18 - 1.0.1-1

I guess at less you made a versión bump.

6. Send a pull request with the updated spec.

7. Finally %post and %postun should go after %%install (or %%?check), can find a example here:

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/exaile.git/tree/exaile.spec

Does this spec file (https://github.com/ksinkar/bash-git-prompt/blob/rpm_spec/bash-git-prompt.spec) look good? I have updated it to meet the patterns as given in the example file. I have also implemented all the suggestions as I understood them.

I am not deleting the %clean section, because I want this to be acceptable by epel repos as well.

Let me know if any changes are required in the spec file. I shall merge the spec file in upstream once it is finalized.

Please remove this:

%clean
rm -rf %{buildroot}

Sorry for the very late feedback, do you still want to go ahead to get this package in Fedora?

Yes, I am interested in going ahead with this package. And I am also interested in adding some other packages as well.

Can you please post the last version of the spec in the form of:

Spec URL: 
SRPM URL:

(In reply to William Moreno from comment #8)
> Can you please post the last version of the spec in the form of:
> 

SPEC URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ksinkar/bash-git-prompt/rpm-spec/bash-git-prompt.spec

SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/ksinkar/prelude/srpm-builds/00735465/bash-git-prompt-2.7.1-1.fc27.src.rpm

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.

What further information is needed from me?

(In reply to Koustubh Sinkar from comment #12)
> What further information is needed from me?

Hi, 
I'd like to review this package but the issue is, the link from comment #9 has been expired.
I've tried to build it from the Specfile, but it's no success [1].

Would you like to re-upload it?

[1] https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/didiksupriadi41/review-bash-git-prompt-component/srpm-builds/02362947/builder-live.log.gz

Hello 🙏,

Please find below the updated URIs

SPEC URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ksinkar/bash-git-prompt/rpm-spec/bash-git-prompt.spec

SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ksinkar/prelude/fedora-33-x86_64/02363333-bash-git-prompt/bash-git-prompt-2.7.1-1.fc33.src.rpm

I hope this helps.

(In reply to Didik Supriadi from comment #13)
> (In reply to Koustubh Sinkar from comment #12)
> > What further information is needed from me?
> 
> Hi, 
> I'd like to review this package but the issue is, the link from comment #9
> has been expired.
> I've tried to build it from the Specfile, but it's no success [1].
> 
> Would you like to re-upload it?
> 
> [1]
> https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/didiksupriadi41/review-
> bash-git-prompt-component/srpm-builds/02362947/builder-live.log.gz

Please find the below the updated URIs:

SPEC URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ksinkar/bash-git-prompt/rpm-spec/bash-git-prompt.spec

SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ksinkar/prelude/fedora-33-x86_64/02363333-bash-git-prompt/bash-git-prompt-2.7.1-1.fc33.src.rpm

I hope this helps.

> License:        BSD-2-Clause

This is true but it must be filled with its short name.
See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_valid_license_short_names
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Good_Licenses

> Source0:        https://github.com/magicmonty/%{name}/archive/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

Invalid URL.
To correctly reference the source, See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/

> %post
> # enable bash-git-prompt
> cat << EOF >> /etc/bashrc
> %{START_TOKEN}
> if [ -f %{_datadir}/%{name}/gitprompt.sh ]; then
>     # Set config variables first
>
>     GIT_PROMPT_ONLY_IN_REPO=1
>     GIT_PROMPT_THEME=Default
>     source %{_datadir}/%{name}/gitprompt.sh
> fi
> %{END_TOKEN}
> EOF
>
> %postun
> # remove bash-git-prompt setup
> sed -i -e '/^%{START_TOKEN}/, /^%{END_TOKEN}/{d}' /etc/bashrc

You should not edit the file that you don't own.

> files
> %defattr(-,root,root,-)

This is not needed anymore.
See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_permissions

> install -pm 644 README.md %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}

README already in %doc, right?

> * Sat Mar 31 2018 Koustubh Sinkar <ksinkar>
> - Making the spec file more standards compliant
> - support for new lines
> 
> * Tue Jun 28 2016 Koustubh Sinkar <ksinkar>
> - Updating the spec file to reflect more recent changes

You should write the version in changelog.
See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#changelogs

You still need to find a sponsor. 

You can find a sponsor here: https://docs.pagure.org/fedora-sponsors/
Here's the tips how to get sponsored: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group

Hi, It's been a while.
Could you continue this process? If you have questions, just ask!

(In reply to Didik Supriadi from comment #18)
> Hi, It's been a while.
> Could you continue this process? If you have questions, just ask!

I have already blocked this on the FE-NEEDSPONSORS tracker. I think Parag was going to sponsor me. I am not sure how to restart this process. I guess I need to review some packages and give proof of that review here to get him to sponsor me.

(In reply to Koustubh Sinkar from comment #19)
> I have already blocked this on the FE-NEEDSPONSORS tracker. I think Parag
> was going to sponsor me.

Good.

btw You could still continue this package review process by fixing the spec file
based on comment 16 and upload the new one.

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.