Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 191671
Review Request: serpentine
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:32 EST
Spec URL: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/serpentine.spec
SRPM URL: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/serpentine-0.6.4-1.src.rpm
Serpentine is an application for writing CD-Audio discs.
It aims for simplicity, usability and compatibility
A few preliminary comments:
* These directories should be owned, otherwise they hang around after
* The russian entry in the .desktop file doesn't seem to be UTF-8...
How can I deal with the russian entry issue? The ru.po file claims to be utf-8.
I'm pretty sure it's not UTF-8. I ran through a bunch of encodings and didn't
see one that would produce meaningful output when viewed on a Unicode-capable
I would ask upstream. If you have no luck there, you could always remove the
Russian translation and work to get it in later.
(In reply to comment #2)
> How can I deal with the russian entry issue? The ru.po file claims to be utf-8.
I now tested it running with "LANG=ru_RU serpentine": It is certainly not utf-8.
Only the standard menus have correct cyrillic letters.
This is however not a blocker, since it is not your job as a packager to ensure
that translations are correct. You should simply notify upstream about it.
Another point from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python:
The python-abi req is not needed on FC-4 upwards anymore.
I'm jumping in for a formal review. Stay tuned.
Is there a particular reason not to use serpentine-0.6.91?
0.6.91 introduces support for gstreamer-1.0 and fixes the issuse with the
russian desktop.file and translations. Unfortunately German translations were
dropped :(, maybe I'm going to update them.
Attaching a patch. This patch also fixes the following issues:
- own /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/serpentine and
/usr/share/serpentine (comment #1)
- drop python-abi Requires: (comment # 4)
- drop serpentine-0.6.4-desktop.patch and use sed instead
- description now ends with a dot: "...simplicity, usability and compatibility."
BTW: IMHO description could be a little mor elaborate, something like:
"Serpentine is an application for writing CD-Audio discs.
It aims for simplicity, usability and compatibility and accepts a big range of
audio (and video) formats thanks to the excelent GStreamer framework. It also
tries to integrate well with other applications, accepting full Drag N Drop
from applications like Nautilus, Rhythmbox and even Firefox."
(parts taken from http://gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=907)
- require gstreamer-python instead of gstreamer08-python
- remove-category X-Ximian-Main from fedora-serpentine.desktop
A minor note: Calling update-desktop-database in post and postun was not
necessary, because the desktop entry did not contain a mime type. 0.6.91 has a
mime type, so we do need it now.
Take what you need from my patch and update your package please. I'm going do do
a complete review then. From what I've seen everything looks fine, package
builds in mock and works well. I've successfully burned a couple of audio discs,
in fact I'm using serpentine for a long time and rolled my own package. Nice to
see somebody is willing to maintain it for extras. :-)
Created attachment 129598 [details]
Patch for serpentine.spec
diff -u serpentine-0.6.4.spec serpentine.spec
(In reply to comment #7)
Sorry, I just realized there'S a typo in my patch:
"--remove-cetagory" needs to be
Updated spec: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/serpentine.spec
Updated SRPM: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/serpentine-0.6.91-1.src.rpm
$ md5sum serpentine-0.6.91-1.src.rpm
- rpmlint clean:
$ ls *.rpm
$ rpmlint *.rpm ; echo $?
- package and spec naming OK
- package meets guidelines
- license is GPL, matches license field spec
- license both included in source and %doc
- spec file written in English and is legible
- sources match upstream
- package builds OK on FC5 (noarch) and in FC5 and rawhide mock (noarch)
- BR's OK, on duplicates, no exeptions
- locales handled correctly
- no libraries to worry about
- not relocatable
- no directory ownership issues
- no duplicates in %files
- permissions OK, correct %defattr
- %clean section present and correct
- macro usage consistent
- code, not content
- no large docs
- docs don't affect runtime
- no pkgconfigs to worry about
- no devel sub package needed
- desktop file OK and properly installed
- scriptlets match examples from wiki
Just a reminder that this report should probably be closed, package is in CVS,
owners.list and in the FE repos.
BTW. 0.7 is out. :-)
Sindre, please close you reviews if your package becomes available.