Bug 479803 (cabal2spec)
| Summary: | Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jens Petersen <petersen> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Parag AN(पराग) <panemade> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, haskell-devel, notting, panemade |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | panemade:
fedora-review+
kevin: 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: | 2009-02-25 09:52:17 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
Jens Petersen
2009-01-13 07:22:03 UTC
few questions 1) why URL still drafts url? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Haskell 2) just a suggestion. How about using package name as haskell-packager? 3) Can it be possible to have all those Source files be tarred and released with license file on fedorapeople currently till you get fedorahosted page? 4) spec templates can be installed in /etc/rpmdevtools location instead to go for some %{_datadir}/%{name} location. Good questions: > 1) why URL still drafts url? > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Haskell Yeah it is kind of a chicken'n'egg kind of situation. Actually I didn't follow the whole process of fontpackages wrt FPC (Fedora Packaging Committee) and the recent revision of the Fonts Packaging Guidelines: the files in the package are really part of the new Haskell Packaging Draft so it would probably make sense for them to be looked at by FPC as part of the Haskell Packaging Guidelines revision process. > 2) just a suggestion. How about using package name as haskell-packager? Hmm maybe the rpm macros and the templates should be separated then. There are more rpm bits (scripts) coming for dependency generation. I could move the spec templating part to haskell-packager: in the longer term we would probably like to rewrite/replace it with something in Haskell (like cabal2rpm). > 3) Can it be possible to have all those Source files be tarred and released > with license file on fedorapeople currently till you get fedorahosted page? Yeah, before doing that I just wanted to put it out for discussion first. :) Currently it is really small though and I doubt any other non-derived distro would be interested in the templates anyway so I was half-naively thinking that it could even just live in pkg cvs but that would probably be frowned upon these days? > 4) spec templates can be installed in /etc/rpmdevtools location instead to go > for some %{_datadir}/%{name} location. Good point: I will change that. Thanks. Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging-0.3-1.fc10.src.rpm (In reply to comment #1) > 1) why URL still drafts url? > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Haskell Added a comment > 2) just a suggestion. How about using package name as haskell-packager? Still thinking on this - added a comment in spec - I need to look at some other packages for examples. > 3) Can it be possible to have all those Source files be tarred and released > with license file on fedorapeople currently till you get fedorahosted page? Done (but untested:) > 4) spec templates can be installed in /etc/rpmdevtools location instead to go > for some %{_datadir}/%{name} location. Done Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging-0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging-0.4-1.fc10.noarch.rpm Templates and cabal2spec have been removed from ghc-6.10.1-7.fc11 so this should now install. * Tue Jan 20 2009 Jens Petersen <petersen> - 0.4-1 - move ghc_version back to templates for now - leave macros.ghc in ghc - require ghc Still open to improvements to the name. :) Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging-0.4-2.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/haskell-packaging/haskell-packaging-0.4-2.fc10.noarch.rpm * Tue Jan 20 2009 Jens Petersen <petersen> - 0.4-2 - remove old todo comments about splitting and ghc dep I think now it makes more sense to name the package after the script itself (currently cabal2spec). Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.4-3.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.4-3.fc10.noarch.rpm Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.5-1.fc10.noarch.rpm I dunno how long it will be before FPC revisits the Haskell Guidelines. (I guess I need to submit it formally after the initial RFC.) Maybe we can just complete this review and then make any updates later as appropriate? It would be good to have this included in F11 anyway IMHO. This is the changelog: * Mon Feb 9 2009 Jens Petersen <petersen> - 0.5-1 - add cabal2spec-diff script to diff current spec against current template - add ghc-doc BR to binlib and lib templates you should have
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/rpmdevtools
like we have in rpmdevtools
Fixed Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.6-1.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.6-1.fc10.noarch.rpm (The project will be hosted very soon at fedorahosted.) Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.7-1.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.7-1.fc10.noarch.rpm * Mon Feb 23 2009 Jens Petersen <petersen> - 0.7-1 - cabal2spec-0.7: - use %%global instead of %%define - quieten output of scripts - updates urls to fedorahosted Source and tarballs now on fedorahosted. Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i386). koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1145408 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url d2586c3c99e2ae06c8721409cf440343 cabal2spec-0.7.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI App. APPROVED. Thanks for the review. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: cabal2spec Short Description: RPM packaging tool for Haskell Cabal Packages Owners: petersen Branches: F-10 F-9 InitialCC: haskell-sig cvs done. Thanks - package imported and built. |