Hi all!

why wasn't this submission reviewed yet?

Thanks in advance.

[fedora-review-service-build]

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9740261
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2385923-docmake/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09740261-docmake/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.

[fedora-review-service-build]

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9936314
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2385923-docmake/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09936314-docmake/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.

Taking this review.

Initial spec review:

> %setup -q -n App-XML-DocBook-Builder-%{version}

If you're not planning to push this back into EPEL 9 and older, please use "%autosetup -C". 
If you are planning on supporting those older releases, then please use "%autosetup -n App-XML-DocBook-Builder-%{version}" instead.

> ./Build install --destdir=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT --create_packlist=0
> %{_fixperms} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*

Please use "%{buildroot}" instead of "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT"

Note that since this is a CPAN module, the package name should follow our convention for CPAN modules.

Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_perl_modules

The program "docmake" should be subpackaged out into a binary package "docmake" that depends on the perl module itself.

Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~shlomif/fedora/packages/perl-App-XML-DocBook-Builder.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~shlomif/fedora/packages/perl-App-XML-DocBook-Builder-0.1101-1.fc44.src.rpm

thanks

Initial spec notes:

> Summary:        Dependencies of docmake

This should be updated to something a bit better. Maybe "Module to convert DocBook/XML files to DocBook's output formats"?

From fedora-review:

> [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
>      Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
>      /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/App(git-autofixup, perl-App-Cmd,
>      tangerine, perl-App-CLI, perl-App-Rad, perlbrew, perl-App-DuckDuckGo,
>      perl-App-cpm, perl-Config-Model-Itself, licensecheck, perl-App-
>      find2perl, perl-App-a2p, perl-App-Daemon, perl-pod2pdf, perl-App-PFT,
>      perl-PAR-Packer, perl-Test2-Harness, ack, perl-App-mymeta_requires,
>      perl-rdapper, perl-App-Cme, perl-App-GitHooks, perl-App-Yath-Script,
>      perl-Test-Harness, perl-App-cpanminus, perl-Module-Package-RDF, perl-
>      TAP-Formatter-HTML, perl-App-Packager, perl-App-CSV, perl-App-
>      FatPacker, perl-App-ccdiff, perl-RDF-NS, perl-podlinkcheck, perl-App-
>      perlimports, perl-App-SVN-Bisect, perl-App-p, perl-App-Nopaste, perl-
>      Pinto, dropbox-api-command, perl-App-grindperl, perl-CPAN, perl-App-
>      Cache, clusterssh, perl-Perl-Tags)

Maybe "%{perl_vendorlib}/App/" should be changed to something more specific?

It seems like it's somewhat common to co-own them, so I'm okay with kind of waiving this...

Also the docmake package should have a "Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}" stanza, since it strictly requires the module.

FEDORA-2026-eb7f5e5baa (python-yt-dlp-ejs-0.8.0^20260524.d60b824-1.fc46) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 46.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-eb7f5e5baa

FEDORA-2026-eb7f5e5baa (python-yt-dlp-ejs-0.8.0^20260524.d60b824-1.fc46) has been pushed to the Fedora 46 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Sorry, I copy-pasted the wrong bug into a Bodhi update 🙈. It should have been https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2486100. Let me reopen this.

(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #11)
> From fedora-review:
> 
> > [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
> >      Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
> >      /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/App(git-autofixup, perl-App-Cmd,
> >      tangerine, perl-App-CLI, perl-App-Rad, perlbrew, perl-App-DuckDuckGo,
> >      perl-App-cpm, perl-Config-Model-Itself, licensecheck, perl-App-
> >      find2perl, perl-App-a2p, perl-App-Daemon, perl-pod2pdf, perl-App-PFT,
> >      perl-PAR-Packer, perl-Test2-Harness, ack, perl-App-mymeta_requires,
> >      perl-rdapper, perl-App-Cme, perl-App-GitHooks, perl-App-Yath-Script,
> >      perl-Test-Harness, perl-App-cpanminus, perl-Module-Package-RDF, perl-
> >      TAP-Formatter-HTML, perl-App-Packager, perl-App-CSV, perl-App-
> >      FatPacker, perl-App-ccdiff, perl-RDF-NS, perl-podlinkcheck, perl-App-
> >      perlimports, perl-App-SVN-Bisect, perl-App-p, perl-App-Nopaste, perl-
> >      Pinto, dropbox-api-command, perl-App-grindperl, perl-CPAN, perl-App-
> >      Cache, clusterssh, perl-Perl-Tags)
> 
> Maybe "%{perl_vendorlib}/App/" should be changed to something more specific?
> 
> It seems like it's somewhat common to co-own them, so I'm okay with kind of
> waiving this...

Yeah, I think this is okay here. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/#_directory_ownership.

Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~shlomif/fedora/packages/perl-App-XML-DocBook-Builder.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~shlomif/fedora/packages/perl-App-XML-DocBook-Builder-0.1101-1.fc44.src.rpm

thanks