Bug 451771
| Summary: | Review Request: maximus - an addon for metacity | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond> | ||||||
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Michel Lind <michel> | ||||||
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||||
| Priority: | low | ||||||||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | bnocera, fedora-package-review, jonathan.roberts.uk, jonrob.one, jreznik, mail, michel, notting | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | j:
fedora-review?
|
||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2009-09-14 21:42:56 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: | 451769 | ||||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 462851 | ||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Yaakov Nemoy
2008-06-17 09:58:14 UTC
Created attachment 309633 [details]
spec file cleanup
Attached is an initial patch to cleanup the spec file somewhat. With this the
srpm created passes rpmlint. It probably needs some extra build reqs. You also
need to change the name/email in the Changelog entry.
I think there possibly should also be some post install gconf stuff too but
need to check that out further. Someone in the know should be able to confirm
it.
Updated the spec file to make it comply with packaging guidelines better, as well as renamed to remove Ubuntu from the name. SPEC File: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/repo/maximus.spec SRPM File: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/repo/maximus-0.3.14-1.fc9.src.rpm Have spoken with Yaakov, and will likely co-maintain these packages. Updated the spec file to the latest upstream, and I believe this should pass review now. SPEC File: http://jonrob.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/maximus.spec SRPM File: http://jonrob.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/maximus-0.4.0-1.fc10.src.rpm The same as for go-home-applet. Just some small comments on your spec file %description section - There is a blank line before the description starts. "Blank lines are assumed to separate paragraphs..." from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#Spec_file_pieces_explained - IMHO, Ubuntu should been remove from the description because we don't use the 'Ubuntu Netbook userspace stack' in Fedora, or do we? Version 0.4.1 was released -> https://edge.launchpad.net/~netbook-remix-team/+archive Any progress on this? Sorry, none. I have been busy. If you don't mind letting this wait in the queue, hopefully i will come back to it soon. Created attachment 340181 [details]
Updated spec file
Here's an updated spec file for 0.4.8; it properly registers the GConf settings. Yaakov, do you have time to package, in which case I'd be more than happy to perform a review?
I have a complete Netbook stack working now (Maximus/netbook-launcher/window-picker-applet); I can review this and you can review netbook-launcher and window-picker
I would love to. If you don't hear from me in a week, ping me here again. Also, i suppose we'll want to co-maintain packages, so we can stay on top of things. Is anyone reviewing this package? Why is it assigned with no fedora-review flag set? I guess I'll go ahead and set the flag, but I'm starting to think this should just be closed instead. Jason: was waiting on Yaakov, and I guess I just forgot about it myself. Yaakov, do you want to continue the review, or can I close this and file my own? Yeah, go ahead with your own. Yaakov, thanks. I guess you're using xmonad now? Fabian, do you want to continue reviewing? *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 523330 *** |