Bug 247408
| Summary: | Review Request: compizconfig-python - Python bindings for the Compiz Configuration System | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mohd Izhar Firdaus Ismail <mohd.izhar.firdaus> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, jarod, leigh123linux, lxtnow, mtasaka, notting, s.adam, tjb |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | mtasaka:
fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2007-10-27 14:25:00 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: | 247406 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 328981 | ||
|
Description
Mohd Izhar Firdaus Ismail
2007-07-09 04:39:08 UTC
Added block dependency I've updated the package to 0.6.0 branch SRPM: http://izhar.fedorapeople.org/compizconfig-python/compizconfig-python-0.6.0-1.c4e49d.fc8.src.rpm SPEC: http://izhar.fedorapeople.org/compizconfig-python/compizconfig-python.spec (removing NEEDSPONSOR) bug 247406 closed today's update: http://izhar.fedorapeople.org/compizconfig-python/compizconfig-python-0.6.0-0.2.20071018git0e80b1.fc8.src.rpm Well, although F8 freeze has already come, I hope ccsm
(and then also this package) can be included before
F8 is released.
My comments for 0.6.0-0.2.XXXXXX
* Seemingly too long name
- rpmlint complains that the name of binary rpms are too
long.
--------------------------------------------------------------
$ rpmlint *rpm
compizconfig-python.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog
0.6.0-2.20071018git0e80b1 0.6.0-0.2.20071018git0e80b1.fc8
compizconfig-python-debuginfo.i386: W: filename-too-long-for-joliet
compizconfig-python-debuginfo-0.6.0-0.2.20071018git0e80b1.fc8.i386.rpm
compizconfig-python-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
compizconfig-python-devel.i386: W: filename-too-long-for-joliet
compizconfig-python-devel-0.6.0-0.2.20071018git0e80b1.fc8.i386.rpm
$ rpmlint -I filename-too-long-for-joliet
filename-too-long-for-joliet :
This filename is too long to fit on a joliet filesystem (limit is 64 unicode chars).
--------------------------------------------------------------
Please consider to shorten the rpms' name.
* .pc file
- Is this .pc file (and then -devel subpackage) really needed?
* -devel package does not contain any libraries or header files
* This file does not seem to be used to rebuild ccsm.
! COPYING
- Well, the source codes are actually under LGPLv2+, however COPYING
file is GPL. The license tag can be LGPLv2+, however please ask the
developer to change COPYING file (this is not a blocker).
//
* .pc file
- Is this .pc file (and then -devel subpackage) really needed?
* -devel package does not contain any libraries or header files
* This file does not seem to be used to rebuild ccsm.
//
ure right, the .pc file is not needed anymore (it was needed by the configure
script before, thats where that BuildDep came from)
so, should I merge this file with the main package?
Simply removing .pc file is better. the .pc file might be used by some other softwares to detect the existence of compizconfig-python .. (like what ccsm done before) .. hurm .. so, just ignore that for now and add later in case somebody filed a bug?? .. s/"in case"/"after"/ IMO if some package needs compizconfig-python, then the package should check by python -c "import compizconfig" for example, not by this useless .pc file. Okay to me. errr .. (noobie question) am i supposed to set the fedora-review flag to + myself??? .. (In reply to comment #13) > errr .. (noobie question) am i supposed to set the fedora-review flag to + > myself??? .. You should not do that. I can reassign this bug to myself, however I want to wait what Ignacio says one more day before doing it. -------------------------------------------------------------- This package (compizconfig-python) is APPROVED by me -------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Perhaps F-8 branch will be created soon, so when you request CVS branch, please also request to create F-8 branch. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-October/msg01515.html New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: compizconfig-python Short Description: Python bindings for the Compiz Configuration System Owners: izhar Branches: F-8 Devel InitialCC: izhar Cvsextras Commits: yes cvs done. Closing for now. Hi Mohd Izhar, Is it ok for me to request a epel6 branch? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677365 Thanks Leigh Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: compizconfig-python New Branches: el6 Owners: leigh123linux Git done (by process-git-requests). |