Bug 2182311 - Review Request: kddockwidgets - Qt dock widget library
Summary: Review Request: kddockwidgets - Qt dock widget library
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: 38
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Vitaly
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://github.com/KDAB/KDDockWidgets
Whiteboard:
: 2181957 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 1874343
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-03-28 07:57 UTC by Vasiliy Glazov
Modified: 2023-04-02 16:33 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-03-28 13:17:55 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:
vitaly: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 5715858 to 5716432 (1.53 KB, patch)
2023-03-28 12:18 UTC, Jakub Kadlčík
no flags Details | Diff

Description Vasiliy Glazov 2023-03-28 07:57:59 UTC
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Vascom/kddockwidgets/main/kddockwidgets.spec
SRPM URL: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3814/99223814/kddockwidgets-1.6.0-1.fc39.src.rpm


Description:
Qt dock widget library written by KDAB, suitable for replacing QDockWidget and implementing advanced functionalities missing in Qt.

Although KDDockWidgets is ready to be used out of the box, it can also be seen as a framework to allow building very tailored custom docking systems. It tries to expose every internal widget and every knob for the app developer to tune.

FAS username: vascom

Comment 1 Jakub Kadlčík 2023-03-28 08:11:18 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5715858
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2182311-kddockwidgets/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05715858-kddockwidgets/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 2 Vitaly 2023-03-28 10:53:37 UTC
> Source0:        %{url}%{version}/archive/refs/tags/v1.6.0.tar.gz

Source0: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

> BuildRequires:  qt5-qtbase-private-devel

Private API has no ABI compatibility, so you must pin to exact Qt version:

%{?_qt5:Requires: %{_qt5}%{?_isa} = %{_qt5_version}}

> %cmake -G Ninja

Please add the correct build type, or fallback to Debug will be used implicitly:

%cmake -G Ninja -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release

> rm -r %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc

Why removing docs? I think they can be packaged to a -docs noarch subpackage.

> %{_libdir}/libkddockwidgets.so.*

You must include soversion to prevent accidental bumps:

%{_libdir}/libkddockwidgets.so.1*

Comment 3 Vitaly 2023-03-28 11:13:54 UTC
> License:        GPL-3.0-only

License: GPL-3.0-only AND GPL-2.0-only AND BSD-3-Clause

Comment 4 Vitaly 2023-03-28 11:14:31 UTC
> %license LICENSE.GPL.txt LICENSE.txt

%license LICENSES/*

Comment 5 Vasiliy Glazov 2023-03-28 12:06:41 UTC
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Vascom/kddockwidgets/main/kddockwidgets.spec
SRPM URL: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3072/99233072/kddockwidgets-1.6.0-2.fc39.src.rpm

Source0: corrected.

Private API requires added.

DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release added.

docs removed because it contain only licenses files.
error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
   /usr/share/doc/KDDockWidgets/LICENSE.txt
   /usr/share/doc/KDDockWidgets/LICENSES/BSD-3-Clause.txt
   /usr/share/doc/KDDockWidgets/LICENSES/GPL-2.0-only.txt
   /usr/share/doc/KDDockWidgets/LICENSES/GPL-3.0-only.txt
   /usr/share/doc/KDDockWidgets/README.md

soversion added.

Comment 6 Jakub Kadlčík 2023-03-28 12:18:53 UTC
Created attachment 1954130 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 5715858 to 5716432

Comment 7 Jakub Kadlčík 2023-03-28 12:18:55 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5716432
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2182311-kddockwidgets/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05716432-kddockwidgets/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 8 Vitaly 2023-03-28 13:06:37 UTC
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.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[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: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* GNU General Public
     License, Version 2", "GNU General Public License, Version 3 GNU
     General Public License, Version 2", "GNU General Public License,
     Version 2", "BSD 3-Clause License GNU General Public License, Version
     2", "*No copyright* BSD 3-Clause License", "*No copyright* [generated
     file]". 151 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-
     rpmbuild/results/kddockwidgets/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: kddockwidgets-1.6.0-2.fc39.x86_64.rpm
          kddockwidgets-devel-1.6.0-2.fc39.x86_64.rpm
          kddockwidgets-debuginfo-1.6.0-2.fc39.x86_64.rpm
          kddockwidgets-debugsource-1.6.0-2.fc39.x86_64.rpm
          kddockwidgets-1.6.0-2.fc39.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmprh_dt_ku')]
checks: 31, packages: 5

kddockwidgets-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kddockwidgets-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/include/kddockwidgets/FrameworkWidgetFactory /usr/include/kddockwidgets/DefaultWidgetFactory
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.6 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: kddockwidgets-debuginfo-1.6.0-2.fc39.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmps0iy0dex')]
checks: 31, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 4

kddockwidgets-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kddockwidgets-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/include/kddockwidgets/FrameworkWidgetFactory /usr/include/kddockwidgets/DefaultWidgetFactory
 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/KDAB/KDDockWidgets/archive/v1.6.0/kddockwidgets-1.6.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 16ea63830a59e88bd338d72043d62086b7cef930b72a6c02c9071821f05637a2
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 16ea63830a59e88bd338d72043d62086b7cef930b72a6c02c9071821f05637a2


Requires
--------
kddockwidgets (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.15)(64bit)
    libQt5Gui.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Gui.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Widgets.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Widgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Widgets.so.5(Qt_5_PRIVATE_API)(64bit)
    libQt5X11Extras.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5X11Extras.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    qt5-qtbase(x86-64)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

kddockwidgets-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cmake-filesystem(x86-64)
    kddockwidgets(x86-64)
    libkddockwidgets.so.1.6()(64bit)

kddockwidgets-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

kddockwidgets-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
kddockwidgets:
    kddockwidgets
    kddockwidgets(x86-64)
    libkddockwidgets.so.1.6()(64bit)

kddockwidgets-devel:
    cmake(KDDockWidgets)
    cmake(kddockwidgets)
    kddockwidgets-devel
    kddockwidgets-devel(x86-64)

kddockwidgets-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    kddockwidgets-debuginfo
    kddockwidgets-debuginfo(x86-64)
    libkddockwidgets.so.1.6.0-1.6.0-2.fc39.x86_64.debug()(64bit)

kddockwidgets-debugsource:
    kddockwidgets-debugsource
    kddockwidgets-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name kddockwidgets --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: PHP, Haskell, SugarActivity, fonts, Ocaml, Python, Java, Perl, R
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 9 Vitaly 2023-03-28 13:06:56 UTC
LGTM now. Package approved.

Comment 10 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2023-03-28 13:13:06 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kddockwidgets

Comment 11 Felix Wang 2023-04-02 16:33:34 UTC
*** Bug 2181957 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.