Bug 659856 - Review Request: eclipse-vrapper - Vim-like editing in Eclipse
Summary: Review Request: eclipse-vrapper - Vim-like editing in Eclipse
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Alexander Kurtakov
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-12-03 21:19 UTC by Jesse Keating
Modified: 2013-01-10 03:34 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-12-31 21:27:24 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
akurtako: fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jesse Keating 2010-12-03 21:19:35 UTC
Spec URL: http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/review/eclipse-vrapper/eclipse-vrapper.spec
SRPM URL: http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/review/eclipse-vrapper/eclipse-vrapper-0.15.0-0.1.svn351.fc14.src.rpm
Description:

Vrapper is an eclipse plugin which acts as a wrapper for eclipse text editors
to provide a Vim-like input scheme for moving around and editing text.

Comment 1 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-04 10:11:11 UTC
I'll do this one.

Comment 2 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-04 10:33:41 UTC
What do you think about compiling/installing jdt/cdt parts too?
It might make sense to make them subpackages because they requires jdt/cdt respectively.

Comment 3 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-04 10:44:37 UTC
Oh and there is http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1697 implementation too. It doesn't need other dependencies so it should be safe to go into the main package.

 %{_libdir}/eclipse/buildscripts/pdebuild -f net.sourceforge.vrapper.plugin.surround
%{_libdir}/eclipse/buildscripts/pdebuild -f net.sourceforge.vrapper.eclipse.jdt.feature -d jdt
%{_libdir}/eclipse/buildscripts/pdebuild -f net.sourceforge.vrapper.eclipse.cdt.feature -d cdt

is all you need to build them all. There will be 3 more zips generated in the rpmbuild folder which you can extract to the proper places.

Comment 4 Jesse Keating 2010-12-07 00:07:07 UTC
I didn't consider those because they weren't built in the upstream vrapper packages.  I don't know what their stability status is, but I'll try 'em.

Comment 5 Jesse Keating 2010-12-07 02:01:30 UTC
Erm, getting some errors on the jdt build:

generateScript:
[eclipse.buildScript] Some inter-plug-in dependencies have not been satisfied.
[eclipse.buildScript] Bundle net.sourceforge.vrapper.aptana.ide:
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.editor.html_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.editors_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.core_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.core.ui_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] Bundle net.sourceforge.vrapper.eclipse.cdt:
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.cdt.ui_5.1.1.


And more for cdt:

generateScript:
[eclipse.buildScript] Some inter-plug-in dependencies have not been satisfied.
[eclipse.buildScript] Bundle net.sourceforge.vrapper.aptana.ide:
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.editor.html_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.editors_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.core_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in com.aptana.ide.core.ui_1.5.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] Bundle org.eclipse.cdt.launch.remote:
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.ui_[3.0.0,4.0.0).
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.subsystems.shells.core_[3.0.0,4.0.0).
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.subsystems.files.core_[3.0.0,4.0.0).
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.core_[3.0.0,4.0.0).
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.services_[3.0.0,4.0.0).
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.files.ui_[3.0.0,4.0.0).
[eclipse.buildScript] Bundle org.eclipse.tm.tcf.rse:
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.core_0.0.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.ui_0.0.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.services_0.0.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.subsystems.files.core_0.0.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.subsystems.processes.core_0.0.0.
[eclipse.buildScript] 	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.rse.processes.ui_0.0.0.


I think I'll leave those disabled and just do the core and surround stuff.

Comment 7 Jesse Keating 2010-12-20 18:50:20 UTC
ping?

Comment 8 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-21 08:03:26 UTC
Sorry for the delay. I forgot about it. Review will follow shortly.

Comment 9 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-12-21 09:40:16 UTC
Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!]  Rpmlint output:
eclipse-vrapper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging
Not a problem.
eclipse-vrapper.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.15.0-0.2.svn ['0.15.0-0.2.svn351.fc14', '0.15.0-0.2.svn351']
Please fix.
eclipse-vrapper.noarch: W: no-documentation
If there is nothing suitable, it's ok.
[x]  Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x]  Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format %{name}.spec.
[x]  Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x]  Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x]  Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines[3,4].
[x]  License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv3+
[-]  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 %doc.
[x]  All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x]  Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]  All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x]  Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]  Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]  Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]  Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]  Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mixing)
[x]  Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x]  Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[-]  Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage
[-]  Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x]  Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[-]  Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x]  Package uses %global not %define
[x]  If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x]  If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be removed prior to building
[x]  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

Issues:
* Incoherent changelog
* Do we need BuildRoot and clean section?
* If you use svn export and compress the tarball as xz you will get 4 times smaller Source0.

Nothing major though.

This package is APPROVED.

Comment 10 Jesse Keating 2010-12-21 22:17:41 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: eclipse-vrapper
Short Description: Vim-like editing in Eclipse
Owners: jkeating
Branches: f14
InitialCC:

Comment 11 Jason Tibbitts 2010-12-22 17:18:52 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 12 Jesse Keating 2010-12-31 21:27:24 UTC
Built for F14 and rawhide.


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