Spec URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.spec SRPM URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go-1.0.5-1.fc22.src.rpm Koji scratchbuild URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10435031 Description: Go (golang) support for Vim. It comes with predefined sensible settings (like auto gofmt on save), has auto-complete, snippet support, improved syntax highlighting, go tool-chain commands, etc... If needed vim-go installs all necessary binaries for providing seamless Vim integration with current commands. It's highly customizable and each individual feature can be disabled/enabled easily. Fedora Account System Username: nforro rpmlint output: $ rpmlint vim-go.spec SRPMS/vim-go-1.0.5-1.fc22.src.rpm vim-go.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US golang -> Angolan, Golan, Angola vim-go.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gofmt -> Goff vim-go.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Update: removed unneeded rm command in %postun section Spec URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.spec SRPM URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go-1.0.5-2.fc22.src.rpm
Update: require golang added command to %postun to clear vim tags Spec URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.spec SRPM URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go-1.0.5-3.fc22.src.rpm
Looks good. - Name matches https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28General.29 - license is OK License file is not installed. Add %license LICENSE [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text]. %post/%postun scriplets should be suffixed with || : so that they cannot fail. I'm not a vim expert, but comparing the scriptlets with vim-taglist I see that vim-taglist removes the file, but you truncate it... Is this intentional? I don't think use should mark %{vimfiles_root}/doc/* with %doc. Packages are not allowed to use stuff marked with %doc at runtime, but this help is used by vim itself, no? Who owns %{vimfiles_root}/autoload, %{vimfiles_root}/compiler, %{vimfiles_root}/ftdetect, etc? Most likely your package should (co-)own those directories.
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #3) > License file is not installed. Add %license LICENSE > [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text]. > There is no license file in the tarball. It was added to upstream master branch later, so it will probably be included in the next release. > %post/%postun scriplets should be suffixed with || : so that they cannot > fail. > Fixed. > I'm not a vim expert, but comparing the scriptlets with vim-taglist I see > that vim-taglist removes the file, but you truncate it... Is this > intentional? > With rm, rpmlint complains about dangerous command in %postun section. > I don't think use should mark %{vimfiles_root}/doc/* with %doc. Packages are > not allowed to use stuff marked with %doc at runtime, but this help is used > by vim itself, no? > That's right, fixed. > Who owns %{vimfiles_root}/autoload, %{vimfiles_root}/compiler, > %{vimfiles_root}/ftdetect, etc? Most likely your package should (co-)own > those directories. Those directories are owned by vim-filesystem package, which is "artificial filesystem" package and it also exists in vim-go's dependency chain, so vim-go shouldn't co-own them. Updated files: Spec URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.spec SRPM URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go-1.0.5-4.fc22.src.rpm
I would suggest to add .metainfo.xml for Gnome Software [1]. You can find inspiration in my vim-command-t package. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#.metainfo.xml_file_creation [2] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/vim-command-t.git/tree/
(In reply to Nikola Forró from comment #4) > (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #3) > > License file is not installed. Add %license LICENSE > > [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text]. > > > > There is no license file in the tarball. It was added to upstream master > branch later, so it will probably be included in the next release. OK. > > I'm not a vim expert, but comparing the scriptlets with vim-taglist I see > > that vim-taglist removes the file, but you truncate it... Is this > > intentional? > With rm, rpmlint complains about dangerous command in %postun section. rpmlint is quite often wrong. But if your version works, that is fine. > > Who owns %{vimfiles_root}/autoload, %{vimfiles_root}/compiler, > > %{vimfiles_root}/ftdetect, etc? Most likely your package should (co-)own > > those directories. > > Those directories are owned by vim-filesystem package, which is "artificial > filesystem" package and it also exists in vim-go's dependency chain, so > vim-go shouldn't co-own them. Pff, I checked that with repoquery but must have messed something up. It is as you say. (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #5) > I would suggest to add .metainfo.xml for Gnome Software [1]. You can find > inspiration in my vim-command-t package. Good point, please add the metadata file. I now filed bugs against other vim plugins to do the same: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=vim%20%22please%20add%20appdata%20metainfo%20file%22 . > Updated files: > Spec URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.spec > SRPM URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go-1.0.5-4.fc22.src.rpm - license is OK - name is OK - description is OK - license file is not present but will be added in next release - layout is good and all directories have ownership - spec file is good - scriptlets are present - rpmlint only false positive typos - requires and provides look OK Package is APPROVED. Please add the metadata file.
One more thing: golang is not available everywhere, so your package should not be built for architectures where the dependencies cannot be satisfied anyway: ExclusiveArch: %{go_arches} noarch (taken from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go#Libraries_and_Arch)
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #5) > I would suggest to add .metainfo.xml for Gnome Software [1]. You can find > inspiration in my vim-command-t package. > > > > [1] > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#.metainfo.xml_file_creation > [2] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/vim-command-t.git/tree/ Added. (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #7) > One more thing: golang is not available everywhere, so your package should > not be built for architectures where the dependencies cannot be satisfied > anyway: > > ExclusiveArch: %{go_arches} noarch > > (taken from > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go#Libraries_and_Arch) Fixed. Spec URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.spec Metainfo URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go.metainfo.xml SRPM URL: https://nforro.fedorapeople.org/vim-go-1.0.5-5.fc22.src.rpm
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: vim-go Short Description: Go development plugin for Vim Upstream URL: https://github.com/fatih/vim-go Owners: nforro jchaloup Branches: f21 f22 f23
Git done (by process-git-requests).
vim-go-1.1-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/vim-go-1.1-1.fc21
vim-go-1.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/vim-go-1.1-1.fc22
Thanks for the review.
vim-go-1.1-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.
vim-go-1.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.