Spec URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/kio-gdrive.spec SRPM URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/kio-gdrive-1.0.3-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Provides KIO Access to Google Drive using the gdrive:/// protocol. Fedora Account System Username: wolnei
Are you still interested in package it? I am can be sponsor or can take the pakage. 1. Update to 1.0.4. 2. Use cmake-style BR: BuildRequires: cmake(KF5GAPI) BuildRequires: cmake(KF5I18n) BuildRequires: cmake(KF5KIO) BuildRequires: cmake(Qt5Keychain) BuildRequires: extra-cmake-modules BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils 3. Use %autosetup instead of %setup -q -n kio-gdrive-%{version} 4. Use %make_build and %make_install macro. 5. Add language files and validate desktop file. You can use my spec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1402886
You should make clear what items are review blockers, and which are not. of those you mentioned, only 5 is a blocker. The rest, some are only general recommendations (2,4) For item 4 in particular, those are tailored for autoconf-based projects, and %make_install in particular misses cmake's nice 'install/fast' target (which is actually used here, and preferable).
I still interested in package, this will be my first package to Fedora. Updated to 1.04, combine both recommendations of Rex and you, Vasiliy. New Spec URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/kio-gdrive.spec New SRPM URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/kio-gdrive-1.0.4-1.fc25.src.rpm
In %files section change paths: %{_libdir}/qt5/plugins/kf5/kio/gdrive.so to %{_qt5_plugindir}/kf5/kio/* and %{_datarootdir}/applications/org.kde.kio-gdrive.desktop to %{_datadir}/applications/* Now as described in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Show_Your_Expertise_by_Commenting_on_other_Review_Requests you should make review for other package so I can sponsor you. Make it according guidlines https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
*** Bug 1402886 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Changed paths. V2 Spec URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/kio-gdrive.spec V2 SRPM URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/kio-gdrive-1.0.4-1.fc25.src.rpm Package review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037427
I am think that "make review request" mean that you need make full review (with run and check fedora-review) with actual package and responsive packager. And if you update SPEC and Srpm URL you not need add "V2", just write it like in first post.
Full review attach to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037427
Oh, sorry, I am not able to be a sponsor. I have not enough experience for it. May be Rex will sponsor. But I make review of your package. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/vascom/1387669-kio-gdrive/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in kio- gdrive-debuginfo [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: kio-gdrive-1.0.4-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm kio-gdrive-debuginfo-1.0.4-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm kio-gdrive-1.0.4-1.fc24.src.rpm kio-gdrive.x86_64: W: desktopfile-without-binary /usr/share/applications/org.kde.kio-gdrive.desktop dolphin 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: kio-gdrive-debuginfo-1.0.4-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- kio-gdrive-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): kio-gdrive (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): application(org.kde.dolphin.desktop) libKF5Completion.so.5()(64bit) libKF5ConfigCore.so.5()(64bit) libKF5CoreAddons.so.5()(64bit) libKF5GAPICore.so.5()(64bit) libKF5GAPIDrive.so.5()(64bit) libKF5I18n.so.5()(64bit) libKF5JobWidgets.so.5()(64bit) libKF5KIOCore.so.5()(64bit) libKF5KIOWidgets.so.5()(64bit) libKF5Service.so.5()(64bit) libKF5WidgetsAddons.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.6)(64bit) libQt5DBus.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Gui.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Network.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Widgets.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Widgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libqt5keychain.so.1()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- kio-gdrive-debuginfo: kio-gdrive-debuginfo kio-gdrive-debuginfo(x86-64) kio-gdrive: application() application(org.kde.kio-gdrive.desktop) kio-gdrive kio-gdrive(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- kio-gdrive: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kf5/kio/gdrive.so Source checksums ---------------- http://download.kde.org/stable/kio-gdrive/1.0.4/src/kio-gdrive-1.0.4.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6ee861268a90e19a9e1123af0a322ee0a70632dc527fd4883ec8e6ea746cc434 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6ee861268a90e19a9e1123af0a322ee0a70632dc527fd4883ec8e6ea746cc434 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1387669 Buildroot used: fedora-24-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
I can review this today
Sorry for the delay. 1. non-blocker/SHOULD: Response to comment #4 , I find that recommendation to be bad in general. I'd recommend reverting that change, to properly track the files included (*especially* the .desktop file name) 2. non-blocker/SHOULD: this dependency is odd: Requires: application(org.kde.dolphin.desktop) better to simply use: Requires: dolphin 3. non-blocker/SHOULD: drop use of %make_build, prefering instead: make %{?_smp_mflags} for now. %make_build (and friends) are tailored to autoconf-based packages Otherwise, fairly simple and clean package, APPROVED I've sponsored you into the packagers group, welcome to fedora! Next steps: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or need anything else. Other development communication channels are very useful too: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicating_and_getting_help fedora-devel mailing list and #fedora-devel irc channels
Final Spec URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/1.0.5/kio-gdrive.spec Final SRPM URL: https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/1.0.5/kio-gdrive-1.0.5-1.fc25.src.rpm
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/kio-gdrive
On second thought, since the .desktop file includes the key: TryExec=dolphin you can safely remove the dependency, Requires: dolphin altogether, the menu item will be shown only if dolphin is available. The kioslave is useful and available to other kf5 kio applications without needing dolphin to be present.
removing NEEDSPONSOR (forgot before, sorry)
Last https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/1.0.5/kio-gdrive.spec Last https://wolnei.fedorapeople.org/rpm/kio-gdrive/1.0.5/kio-gdrive-1.0.5-2.fc25.src.rpm Which is the next step?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join#Check_out_the_module These steps... 2.1.18 Check out the module 2.1.19 Test Your Package 2.1.20 Import, commit, and build your package 2.1.21 Update Your Branches (if desired) 2.1.22 Submit Package as Update in Bodhi
kio-gdrive-1.0.5-2.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-277ecf5ae0
kio-gdrive-1.0.5-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-eda082083d
Thank you for your support, tried follow the next steps earlier but had problems with Koji certificate and git connection, in the second try all works successfully. Now finished all.
kio-gdrive-1.1.0-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1adf6e93e9
kio-gdrive-1.1.0-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a10a22d584
kio-gdrive-1.1.0-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1adf6e93e9
kio-gdrive-1.1.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a10a22d584
kio-gdrive-1.1.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
kio-gdrive-1.1.0-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.