Bug 592733
Summary: | Review Request: turpial - Is cool twitter client with many features and very light | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Edwind Richzendy Contreras Soto <richzendy> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Dennis Gilmore <dennis> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dennis, fedora-package-review, guillermo.gomez, metherid, notting, supercyper1 |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | gwync:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | turpial-1.5.0-2.fc15 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2011-06-21 17:21:55 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
Edwind Richzendy Contreras Soto
2010-05-16 15:25:39 UTC
You forgot to add the blocker. I have done so now. Please review the process outlined below to get sponsored https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group According to my building process python-devel and python-setuptools are Requires. Interesting program. Please follow the guideline below to modify your spec. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python thanks Guilermo and Chei i will work in this feedbacks hi all, here I have an improved version of spec file: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial.spec For those wishing to test the rpm, here's to download: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.3.2-a1.1.fc12.noarch.rpm For those who want the source rpm, here's to download: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.3.2-a1.1.fc12.src.rpm here I have rpmlint output: rpmlint -i turpial-1.3.2-a1.1.fc12.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint -i turpial-1.3.2-a1.1.fc12.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Any recommendation is welcome. 1.The biggest problem for this package is the location for locale. The right place for them should be /usr/share/locale/, the upstream must fix them. I suggest you send a patch to upstream, /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/turpial/i18n is not the appropriate place for them. 2. the release number is wrong, it should be 0.1.a1 See fedora naming guideline 3. /usr/share/doc/turpial -> /usr/share/doc/turpial-%{version} 4. /usr/share/applications/turpial.desktop should some further modification. e.g. icon-> /usr/share/pixmaps/turpial.png See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#.desktop_files 5. Please add a blank line between the changelog entries Thanks Chen: 1. I have been able to see that locals where in a wrong place, just that I wasn't sure. I report this bug past april-4 and I can help developers to fix the location of this files, because I know that this can improve my spec and define better the languajes macro %find_lang http://code.google.com/p/turpial/issues/detail?id=133 ( in spanish ) 2. Done 3. Done 4. i will make a patch to turpial developers 5. Done where have all the required patches and feedback from developers, i can published another new version of the spec Done, just launched a version of the spec that I have done all the suggestions, if someone can review it would be very grateful: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial.spec The src.rpm it's here: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.3.3-1.fc12.src.rpm I have a new release, spec file in: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial.spec The src.rpm it's here: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.3.3-2.fc12.src.rpm rpmlint -i turpial-1.3.3-2.fc12.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint -i turpial-1.3.3-2.fc12.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Any feedback is appreciated. Several minor issues: 1. BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) %install rm -rf %{buildroot} buildroot and cleaning %{buildroot} in %install section is not needed in fedora. 2. %setup -q -n turpial-1.3.3 ->%setup -q 3. Summary: Is cool twitter client with many features and very light ->Summary: Cool twitter client with many features and very light 4. %find_lang %{name} cat %{name}.lang > %{name}-all.lang Why rename %{name}.lang to %{name}-all.lang? 5. %attr(0755,root,root) %{python_sitelib}/%{name}/main.py Why add excutable bit for main.py? Normally, %attr is not needed in %file. %{python_sitelib}/%{name}/main.py should not be listed seperately, list files twice in %file is forbidden in spec. 6. BuildRequires: python-babel >= 0.9.1, python2-devel python-setuptools Requires: python-simplejson >= 1.9.2, python-imaging notify-python >= 0.1.1, pygame >= 1.7, pygtk2 >= 2.12, pywebkitgtk gnome-python2-gtkspell >= 2.25.3 Please check the version of those packages in F12, if the version in F12 > minimum version, then you should not use versioned requirement. e.g. pygtk2 >= 2.12 -> pygtk2 Thanks to feed back Chen: 5. %attr(0755,root,root) %{python_sitelib}/%{name}/main.py Why add excutable bit for main.py? This is due to the error message that provides rpmlint: turpial.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/turpial/main.py 0644L /usr/bin/python Now is required to place a manual page for each executable? : turpial.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary turpial (In reply to comment #11) > Thanks to feed back Chen: > > 5. > > %attr(0755,root,root) %{python_sitelib}/%{name}/main.py > Why add excutable bit for main.py? > > This is due to the error message that provides rpmlint: > > turpial.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/turpial/main.py 0644L /usr/bin/python > > You should remove shebang from this file instead of adding excutable bit. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#Remove_shebang_from_files > > Now is required to place a manual page for each executable? : > > turpial.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary turpial Just ignore this warnings, most rpmlint warnings can be safely ignored. I have a new release, spec file in: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial.spec The src.rpm it's here: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.3.4-1.fc13.src.rpm were implemented all suggestions Chen Lei (Comment 10), Additional suggestions welcome. i ill review and sponsor I have a new release: SRC.rpm: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial-1.5.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Spec file: http://richzendy.org/repo/turpial/turpial.spec builds cleanly in mock, source tarball matches upstream f0c85cc0639287b66210571841920cb35dc9117bce9a3e37616f29b1f1b4768a fedora/SOURCES/turpial-1.5.0.tar.gz f0c85cc0639287b66210571841920cb35dc9117bce9a3e37616f29b1f1b4768a turpial-1.5.0.tar.gz looks good, Approved New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: turpial Short Description: Turpial is a cool twitter client with many features. support to url short and image hosting services, and more. Owners: richzendy Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). Thanks Jon, build done :-) turpial-1.5.0-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/turpial-1.5.0-1.fc14 turpial-1.5.0-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/turpial-1.5.0-1.fc15 turpial-1.5.0-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. turpial-1.5.0-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/turpial-1.5.0-2.fc15 turpial-1.5.0-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/turpial-1.5.0-2.fc14 turpial-1.5.0-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. turpial-1.5.0-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |