Bug 728178
Summary: | Review Request: xfce4-wmdock-plugin - Compatibility layer for running dockapps in an Xfce panel | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | christoph.wickert, mario.blaettermann, notting, package-review |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | mario.blaettermann:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc16 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2011-08-17 01:03:40 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
Martin Gieseking
2011-08-04 10:06:56 UTC
Nice to know that xfce4-wmdock-plugin is back! I'll have a look at it tomorrow. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3256082 $ rpmlint -i -v * xfce4-wmdock-plugin.i686: I: checking xfce4-wmdock-plugin.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dockapps -> dock apps, dock-apps, paddocks The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. xfce4-wmdock-plugin.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapps -> dock apps, dock-apps, paddocks The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. xfce4-wmdock-plugin.i686: I: checking-url http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin (timeout 10 seconds) xfce4-wmdock-plugin.src: I: checking xfce4-wmdock-plugin.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dockapps -> dock apps, dock-apps, paddocks The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. xfce4-wmdock-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapps -> dock apps, dock-apps, paddocks The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. xfce4-wmdock-plugin.src: I: checking-url http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin (timeout 10 seconds) xfce4-wmdock-plugin.src: I: checking-url http://archive.xfce.org/src/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin/0.3/xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) xfce4-wmdock-plugin.x86_64: I: checking xfce4-wmdock-plugin.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dockapps -> dock apps, dock-apps, paddocks The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. xfce4-wmdock-plugin.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapps -> dock apps, dock-apps, paddocks The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. xfce4-wmdock-plugin.x86_64: I: checking-url http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin (timeout 10 seconds) xfce4-wmdock-plugin-debuginfo.i686: I: checking xfce4-wmdock-plugin-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin (timeout 10 seconds) xfce4-wmdock-plugin-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking xfce4-wmdock-plugin-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin (timeout 10 seconds) xfce4-wmdock-plugin.spec: I: checking-url http://archive.xfce.org/src/panel-plugins/xfce4-wmdock-plugin/0.3/xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Common ignorable spelling errors... No real issues so far. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. GPLv2+ according to COPYING and source file headers [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum * b7e7f90add968dd71efd8d1b026b4373 xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4.tar.bz2 b7e7f90add968dd71efd8d1b026b4373 xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4.tar.bz2.packaged [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. - See Koji build above. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [+] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache must be updated. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled. [.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information, the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file [X] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. I'm unsure if desktop-file-install is needed here. Anyway, we have a *.desktop file, but other plugins for Xfce don't even have the desktop-file-install scriptlet. No idea what to do here. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream... [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See Koji build above (which uses mock anyway) [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. Works properly on my machine (x86, xfce-panel-4.8.x). Well, there are some old bugs to fix from upstream's side, but it works with Xfce 4.8 in any case. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ... [.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. Mario, thank you for the review! (In reply to comment #2) > I'm unsure if desktop-file-install is needed here. Anyway, we have a > *.desktop file, but other plugins for Xfce don't even have the > desktop-file-install scriptlet. No idea what to do here. Unfortunately, desktop-file-validate and desktop-file-install don't like Xfce desktop files, i.e. they report errors although the file variants conform the .desktop file specification. Thus, rpmbuild would fail spuriously if desktop-file-FOO were called. Additionally, xfce4-wmdock-plugin isn't a GUI application. Therefore it doesn't provide a "valid" .desktop file in %{_datadir}/applications/ and doesn't create a menu entry. I think the Xfce desktop files must be handled differently compared to those of GUI apps. After having a quick look at several specs of other Xfce plugins, this seems to be the common practice. OK, that's what I thought anyway. ---------------- PACKAGE APPROVED ---------------- Thanks again for the review! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: xfce4-wmdock-plugin Short Description: Compatibility layer for running dockapps in an Xfce panel Owners: mgieseki Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc16 xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc15 xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. xfce4-wmdock-plugin-0.3.4-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. |