Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94421985

This is a new package, but also a rename/recombination of dleyna-core, dleyna-dbus-connector, dleyna-renderer and dleyna-server. I have tried to get the Provides/Obsoletes correct for those (sub)packages wherer it was needed. This combined dleyna is hosted in a different location to the old Intel-maintained (now abandoned) split dleyna packages, and an update to this version is required for getting GUPnP and GSSDP 1.6 into Rawhide as in bug 2078238.

Taking for review. As it's a rename of existing packages, I'll just do a quick check to make sure the obsoletes/provides are correct and skip the full new package review.

Here are all the packages that this replaces:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dleyna-core
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dleyna-connector-dbus
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dleyna-renderer
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dleyna-server

Looking through the binary packages in each of them, it looks like you've missed obsoletes/provides for dleyna-connector-dbus-devel. The rest seem to be correct from what I can tell.

> Provides:  dleyna-core = %{version}
> Obsoletes: dleyna-core < 0.6.0-15
> Provides:  dleyna-core-devel = %{version}
> Obsoletes: dleyna-core-devel < 0.6.0-15
> Provides:  dleyna-renderer-devel = %{version}
> Obsoletes: dleyna-renderer-devel < 0.6.0-16

Instead of just %{version}, I would use %{version}-%{release} in provides, as that's the usual pattern used in Fedora packages.

As for the obsoletes, they look right to me, but versioning them like this can be a bit fragile and break if one of the packages gets a release bump and rebuild for some reason in F37. It might be worth using < %{version}-%{release} for obsoletes as well to avoid that pitfall.

> rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_libdir}/dleyna/libdleyna-renderer-1.0.so \
>        %{buildroot}/%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/dleyna-renderer-service-1.0.pc \
>        %{buildroot}/%{_libdir}/dleyna-server/libdleyna-server-1.0.so \
>        %{buildroot}/%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/dleyna-server-service-1.0.pc \
>        %{_includedir}/dleyna-1.0/renderer \
>        %{_includedir}/dleyna-1.0/server

I think I would just install all of them, but up to you. I would guess that they were excluded previously because someone didn't want to go through the trouble of creating a -devel package to put them into, but since you already have a common -devel package it would maybe be easier to just install all of them.

> License: LGPLv2+

For new packages this has to be an SPDX ID, as per latest licensing guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_valid_license_short_names

One more thing:

> BuildRequires: python-devel

I believe this should be explicit "python3-devel" as per https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_dependencies

"Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) with the unversioned prefix python- if the corresponding python3- dependency can be used instead."

Thanks! I just did a scratch build with the dleyna-connector-dbus-devel obsoletes/provides addition, license change, python-devel change, %{version}-%{release} change and added a comment explaining that the separate devel packages were dropped because there are no consumers in Fedora (but can easily be added again in future, if requested).

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=95138479

Thanks! Looks good to me.

APPROVED

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dleyna

FEDORA-2022-05bc988aec has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-05bc988aec

FEDORA-2022-05bc988aec has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.