Bug 177507

Created attachment 123047 [details]
pida 0.2.2-0.1 spec file

Created attachment 123049 [details]
pida 0.2.2-0.1 src rpm

Created attachment 123051 [details]
pida 0.2.2-0.2 src rpm

Created attachment 123052 [details]
pida 0.2.2-0.2 spec file

list of known issues:

- gazpacho integration not working with since gazpacho 0.6.3 too new (will be
fixed with pida 0.3.0 in a few weeks.

- usually bicyclerepair would be required to load the python plugins but i left
the dependencys out since the plugins (browser/profiler/debugger) dont load
anyways. (will be fixed with 0.3.0)

- This
>Requires:   python-abi = %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]")
is not needed anymore -- works automatically in FC4 and later
- Don't repeat the name of the package in the beginning of the summary
- The license doesn't look like GPL
- Description needs a linebreak after 80 chars
- Description might be a bit to long
- Change
Requires:   desktop-file-utils
to
BuildRequires:   desktop-file-utils
- In the future please add versions in the changelog entrys
- why "Release: 0.2" and not "Release: 2"?
- saw those warnings when starting pida:
which: no pydoc in
(/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/rpmbuild/usr/bin:/home/rpmbuild/server/usr/bin)
which: no xemacs in
(/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/rpmbuild/usr/bin:/home/rpmbuild/server/usr/bin)
Are they relevant?
- In the future please upload the srpms somewhere to the web and post only post
links to it -- don't attach the packages in bugzilla

(In reply to comment #5)
> list of known issues:
> - usually bicyclerepair would be required to load the python plugins but i left
> the dependencys out since the plugins (browser/profiler/debugger) dont load
> anyways. (will be fixed with 0.3.0)

I would add it nevertheless 

Created attachment 124368 [details]
pida 0.3.1-0.1 spec file

version upgrade, lots of fixes.

Created attachment 124369 [details]
pida 0.3.1-0.2 spec file

only fixes summary as suggested by thl

(In reply to comment #6)
> - This
> >Requires:   python-abi = %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]")
> is not needed anymore -- works automatically in FC4 and later

alright thats cleaned up now.

> - Don't repeat the name of the package in the beginning of the summary

cosmetical fix done ;)

> - The license doesn't look like GPL

its MIT... fixed

> - Description needs a linebreak after 80 chars

linebreaks done

> - Description might be a bit to long

gotta recheck that. shouldnt be a big problem to make it shorter

> - Change
> Requires:   desktop-file-utils
> to
> BuildRequires:   desktop-file-utils

thats correct and fixed now

> - In the future please add versions in the changelog 

also done

> - why "Release: 0.2" and not "Release: 2"?

this has multible reasons. first i dont want to give the impression that the
package is yet really production ready and second of all i wanted to start of
with a clean -1 release once its approved. in my eyes pida is very promising
software but very young yet so it can definitely use some love and care already.
0.3.1 is a useable release if the embedded vim editor is used.

> - saw those warnings when starting pida:
> which: no pydoc in
>
(/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/rpmbuild/usr/bin:/home/rpmbuild/server/usr/bin)
> which: no xemacs in
>
(/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/rpmbuild/usr/bin:/home/rpmbuild/server/usr/bin)
> Are they relevant?

optional components. pida is a framework.

> - In the future please upload the srpms somewhere to the web and post only post
> links to it -- don't attach the packages in bugzilla

alright but unfortunately thats the reason why i dont have the src rpm up yet. 

> 
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > list of known issues:
> > - usually bicyclerepair would be required to load the python plugins but i left
> > the dependencys out since the plugins (browser/profiler/debugger) dont load
> > anyways. (will be fixed with 0.3.0)
> 
> I would add it nevertheless 

seems to be not even required anymore. but i will talk back to upstream. going
to clear up the issue until the next src rpm upload.

TODO:

1) do something with the stuff in docs/ folder... maybe it would be nice to pdf
those html manuals. suggestions?

2) get the vim problem fixed (actually i had problems to get the external vim
editor going)

3) build install and split off the in extras/ included gazpacho plugin

4) report all found issues to upstream

ping che -- any progress planed?

It's been a really long time since anything happened with this ticket; what's up?