Bug 1545919

Summary: Review Request: typelib-srpm-macros - gobject-introspection typelib sub-package generator macros
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Yanko Kaneti <yaneti>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Jason Tibbitts <j>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: ngompa13, package-review
Target Milestone: ---Flags: j: fedora-review+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-02-15 23:22:31 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 Yanko Kaneti 2018-02-15 20:29:26 UTC
Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/typelib-srpm-macros/typelib-srpm-macros.spec
SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/typelib-srpm-macros/typelib-srpm-macros-1-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description: RPM macros for generating typelib sub-packages for gobject-introspection enabled library packages
Fedora Account System Username: yaneti

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2018-02-15 22:01:48 UTC
There's basically nothing in this package, so not much to review here.  And nothing really wrong with the package.

The URL might confuse some, but this mirrors what other *-srpm-macros packages do (and some of those still reference old pkgs.fp.org cgit URLs).

You can just use %_rpmmacrodir instead of %_rpmconfigdir/macros.d if you like.  There's also %rpmmacrodir (which exists in EPEL, tool) but those were added before RPM grew its own macro.

You don't need %build at all, but I guess if you omit it then rpmlint will complain (needlessly).

I haven't done an in-depth evaluation of the whole set of typelib-related changes you're proposing, but I have taken a look at the macros and they seem pretty much OK to me.  The only concern I have is that "%typelib" is rather generic, and doesn't give any indication that it creates a whole package.  It seems to me that "%typelib_package" would be a bit more descriptive.  But really, that's just bikeshedding, and there is much more that needs to happen before these macros are actually available and usable (including redhat-rpm-config updates, acceptance of the related stuff into gobject-introspection, and related packaging guidelines).

APPROVED

Comment 2 Gwyn Ciesla 2018-02-15 23:07:54 UTC
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/typelib-srpm-macros

Comment 3 Yanko Kaneti 2018-02-15 23:22:31 UTC
Thanks for the review and the suggestions. I've adopted them with the exception of the macro rename, I still like %typelib somewhat better for now

Package built for rawhide. Closing

Comment 4 Neal Gompa 2018-02-18 14:33:24 UTC
So are we finally getting a typelib dependency generator?