Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/nim/fonts-rpm-macros/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01240845-impallari-dancing-script-fonts/impallari-dancing-script-fonts.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/nim/fonts-rpm-macros/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01240845-impallari-dancing-script-fonts/impallari-dancing-script-fonts-2.000-1.20191208gitf7f54bc.fc33.src.rpm Description: Dancing Script is a lively casual script where the letters bounce and change size slightly. Caps are big, and goes below the baseline. Dancing Script references popular scripts typefaces from the 50’s. It relates to Murray Hill (Emil Klumpp. 1956) in his weight distribution, and to Mistral (Roger Excoffon. 1953) in his lively bouncing effect. Use it when you want a friendly, informal and spontaneous look. Fedora Account System Username: nim A font family used in Microsoft PowerApps The packaging conforms to https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/935 as approved by FPC on 2020-02-13. It makes use of our forge automation: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ It is one of the test packages that were used to refine the new packaging guidelines https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nim/fonts-rpm-macros/ The new fonts packaging build chain is now live in koji. For example: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1468243 If the review is fast enough the package may make the FC32 100% Code Complete Deadline (2020-02-25) https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-32/f-32-key-tasks.html
Review: This package follows new fonts packaging guidelines. Rpmlint ------- Checking: impallari-dancing-script-fonts-2.000-1.20191208gitf7f54bc.fc33.noarch.rpm impallari-dancing-script-fonts-2.000-1.20191208gitf7f54bc.fc33.src.rpm impallari-dancing-script-fonts.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/impallari-dancing-script-fonts/FONTLOG.txt impallari-dancing-script-fonts.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/impallari-dancing-script-fonts/FONTLOG.txt 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/impallari/DancingScript/archive/f7f54bc1b8836601dae8696666bfacd306f77e34/DancingScript-f7f54bc1b8836601dae8696666bfacd306f77e34.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f9e396da5f5ead7073d6106c39d4bc849fb193afd0dd4cece2fae7549401bedd CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f9e396da5f5ead7073d6106c39d4bc849fb193afd0dd4cece2fae7549401bedd Requires -------- impallari-dancing-script-fonts (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): config(impallari-dancing-script-fonts) fontpackages-filesystem Provides -------- impallari-dancing-script-fonts: config(impallari-dancing-script-fonts) font(dancingscript) impallari-dancing-script-fonts metainfo() metainfo(org.fedoraproject.impallari-dancing-script-fonts.metainfo.xml) All other things like license, config, metainfo files looks good. Issues: 1) Fix the rpmlint warnings/errors before import of this package 2) I looked for %license in this package spec but cannot find it. Shouldn't we need to mark some file say OFL.txt as %license? I see in other packages when you create -doc subpackage %license gets marked automatically. APPROVED.
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/22549
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/impallari-dancing-script-fonts
Built for F32 (update) and F33 Thanks Parag and Gwyn
The way I was trying to find %license via expanding the macros did not catch %license macro, hence I noted that in my reviews. I think I got the pattern now how fedora-review output is saying missing %license in some cases. I would like to know more about this package. This package spec contains %global fontlicenses OFL.txt I checked its koji build and could not find license directory getting created. See https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=20737044
Interesting! It used to work fine and indeed it worked fine as late as 3 days ago for https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=20704895 that uses the exact same spec construct and was built with the same fonts macro package This is mostly a tidy-up problem (the files are still packaged, but in doc as we used to do some years ago) but it’s annoying. I will investigate
Ok I found the cause, it’s not a weird rpm or macro bug, it’s the usual stupid PEBCAK https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/impallari-dancing-script-fonts/blob/214c93908d61b50d3ad6e6da170af424e0e5c1f4/f/impallari-dancing-script-fonts.spec Sorry about the waste of time, and good catch up!
Thank you. Glad my review helped here.