Spec URL: http://thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/obmenu.spec Spec URL: http://thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/obmenu-1.0-1.src.rpm Description: obmenu is a graphical Openbox menu editor written in Python, and also includes an obxml module to use in one's own scripts.
Review for this package:- Mock Build Results for i386 - Successfully built for i386 MUST Items: - MUST: rpmlint shows no error - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. - MUST: The spec file name matching the base package obmenu, in the format obmenu.spec - MUST: This package meets the Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package is licensed with an open-source compatible license GPL. - MUST: The License field in the package obmenu.spec file matches the actual license file COPYING in tarball. - MUST: The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. md5sum is correct. - MUST: This package owns all directories that it creates. - MUST: This package did not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - MUST: This package have a %clean section, which contains %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot}. - MUST: This package used macros. - MUST: Document files are included like README. This package also followed optimized .pyo files installation successfully. You should follow Python Packaging Guidelines for installing module in pythin_sitelib as %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) %dir %{python_sitelib}/modulename %{python_sitelib}/modulename/*.py %{python_sitelib}/modulename/*.pyc You have not included/created separate directory for your module.
Above is Not an official review as I'm not yet sponsored
Thanks for the prelim comments Parag. Here's a formal review: OK - Package name OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPL) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 710036a5edc9886d6d563ce46c747432 obmenu-1.0.tar.gz 710036a5edc9886d6d563ce46c747432 obmenu-1.0.tar.gz.1 OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. See below - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - No rpmlint output. SHOULD Items: OK - Should include License or ask upstream to include it. OK - Should build in mock. Issues: 1. The new improved python guidelines require not ghosting, but including the .pyo files. Can you make that change? 2. You don't use python_sitearch, so might skip defining it at the top. 3. Should this package have a desktop file? See: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop 4. If I install this package and try and run it, I get: Error: "/home/kevin/.config/openbox/menu.xml" not found Should this package then 'Require: openbox' ? Or otherwise require a menu.xml file?
Thanks for the preliminary review, Kevin. (In reply to comment #3) > Issues: > 1. The new improved python guidelines require not ghosting, but including > the .pyo files. Can you make that change? Fixed in 1.0-2. > 2. You don't use python_sitearch, so might skip defining it at the top. I don't think this is really much of a problem per se, but I have removed it in 1.0-2 as suggested. > 3. Should this package have a desktop file? > See: > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop Added in 1.0-2. > 4. If I install this package and try and run it, I get: > Error: "/home/kevin/.config/openbox/menu.xml" not found > Should this package then 'Require: openbox' ? Or otherwise > require a menu.xml file? Well, the openbox package does not create a menu.xml file of any sorts in the user's home directory. However, I'd very much prefer *not* to dink around with stuff inside of /home as part of a package. For the time being, I've packaged a README.Fedora file (as %doc) that contains instructions on copying the default menu to your home directory. I've also sent an email upstream about this (and included the text of that in the README.Fedora file). Does this suffice? :) URLs for 1.0-2 are as follows: Spec: http://thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/obmenu.spec SRPM: http://thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/obmenu-1.0-2.src.rpm Thanks for your time and review!
That all sounds good. All the blockers I was seeing appear to be fixed, so this package is APPROVED. Don't forget to close this package with NEXTRELEASE when it's been imported and built.
Built for devel; branch requested for FC-5. Thanks for the review! (As an aside, I've received a reply from the upstream author that the next release will feature code attempting to automagically create the user's configuration directory and copy the default menu.xml to it if it does not yet exist. Yay!)
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: obmenu Updated Fedora Owners: extras-orphan I'm orphaning openbox, obconf, and obmenu as I no longer use them and feel that my time is better spent dedicated to my other packages. Thanks.
[ Forgot to set fedora-cvs flag. Please see previous comment. ]
Orphaned.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: obmenu Updated Fedora Owners: mlichvar