Bug 2364617 - Review Request: apostrophe - A distraction free Markdown editor
Summary: Review Request: apostrophe - A distraction free Markdown editor
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard: Unretirement
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-05-06 23:18 UTC by Alexander Lent
Modified: 2025-06-19 10:47 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Alexander Lent 2025-05-06 23:18:05 UTC
Spec URL: https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/xanderlent/rpms/apostrophe/raw/75fbcef3721d63c3b139f1cb5a9016aa74864c66/f/apostrophe.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/xanderlent/apostrophe/srpm-builds/09005644/apostrophe-3.2-1.src.rpm
Description: A distraction free Markdown editor
Fedora Account System Username: xanderlent

I would like to take up maintainer-ship of Apostrophe, since the reason for retirement is no longer applicable.

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-05-06 23:26:30 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9005654
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2364617-apostrophe/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09005654-apostrophe/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/apostrophe, https://src.fedoraproject.org/flatpaks/apostrophe
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names

Please know that there can be false-positives.

---
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 Alex Haydock 2025-05-10 07:35:54 UTC
It looks like this was previously built in Fedora but was retired due to upstream issues (see rhbz#2291412 and rhbz#2290496).

Looking at the upstream repo, I don't think much has changed. The codebase doesn't seem to have been updated in 4 years.

Comment 3 Alexander Lent 2025-05-10 20:14:43 UTC
While it's true that the codebase between 3.0 and 3.2 has been pretty stagnant, (though it seems like there's been a bit more activity since the 3.2 release,) my understanding of the previous reports is that most of the crashes were due to calling functions that didn't exist in  upstream libspelling and gtksouceview5, which have now been upstreamed into recent versions of those libraries.

I've been testing my builds for 3.2, and I haven't yet encountered the previous random crashes, though I have only tested relatively simple Markdown files so far (just text, links, headers, and images).

Comment 4 Yaakov Selkowitz 2025-05-13 23:19:12 UTC
Don't have time for a full package review at the moment, but I tried a local Fedora flatpak build of this and it seems to be working just fine.  As soon as it's back in, I can reinstate the Fedora flatpak.

I'd prefer to see less wildcards in %check and %files, but otherwise I don't see any blatantly obvious problems in the spec file.

Comment 5 Fabio Valentini 2025-06-19 10:47:15 UTC
This looks a bit strange to me:

```
%forgeautosetup -p1
%setup -q -n %{name}-v%{version} -D -T -a1
```

You should very likely either use one or the other. Using more than one %*setup macro will do strange things.


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