Spec URL: http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota.spec SRPM URL: http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota-2.4-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Rachota is a portable application for timetracking different projects. It runs everywhere. It displays time data in diagram form, creates customized reports and invoices or analyses measured data and suggests hints to improve user's time usage. The totally portable yet personal timetracker. Rpmlint output: % rpmlint rachota-* rachota.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US rachota.noarch: W: no-documentation rachota.src: W: invalid-url Source0: rachota.tar.gz 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Sebastien, are you sponsored?
Yes, I already own a package. I have also another review request in progress. My FAS user name is wilqu.
The program crashes sometimes on startup. I'm trying to fix this.
The problem was fixed in trunk and release23 branch. Is there any other problem to bundle Rachota Timetracker into Fedora distribution?
Rachota 2.4 still suffers from crashes on startup, and is not yet officially released, so a started a new spec file with the 2.3 version. SPEC: http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota.spec SRPM: http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota-2.3-1.20111231cvs.fc16.src.rpm This version starts without any problem, so the package is now ready for review.
Dear, like you use cvs for take sources files, you should read this https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages In last you can use install command instead cp
Update taking your remarks into account: http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota.spec http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota-2.3-2.20111231cvs.fc16.src.rpm
The patch has been integrated upstream, so I removed it from the package. http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota.spec http://wilqu.fr/rpms/rachota/rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc16.src.rpm
I have run rpmlint and at this time all it is ok for me. ---------------------- RPMLINT ---------------------- $ rpmlint rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc16.src.rpm rachota.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracker -> time tracker, time-tracker, racetrack rachota.src: W: invalid-url Source0: rachota.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. $ rpmlint ../SPECS/rachota.spec ../SPECS/rachota.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: rachota.tar.gz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint ../RPMS/noarch/rachota-* rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracker -> time tracker, time-tracker, racetrack rachota.noarch: W: no-documentation rachota.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rachota rachota-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== Generic ==== [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using desktop- file-install file if it is a GUI application. [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required [x]: MUST 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. [-]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [-]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict. [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc17.noarch.rpm rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracker -> time tracker, time-tracker, racetrack rachota.noarch: W: no-documentation rachota.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rachota 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. rpmlint rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc17.src.rpm rachota.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracker -> time tracker, time-tracker, racetrack rachota.src: W: invalid-url Source0: rachota.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. rpmlint rachota-javadoc-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc17.noarch.rpm rachota-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [!]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. ==== Java ==== [x]: MUST If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be removed prior to building [x]: MUST Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils [x]: MUST Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: MUST Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage [x]: MUST Javadoc subpackages have Requires: jpackage-utils [x]: MUST Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink) [x]: SHOULD Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible) [x]: SHOULD Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) ==== Maven ==== [x]: MUST Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used [-]: MUST If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant Issues: [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc17.noarch.rpm rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracker -> time tracker, time-tracker, racetrack rachota.noarch: W: no-documentation rachota.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rachota 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. rpmlint rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc17.src.rpm rachota.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracking -> time tracking, time-tracking, sidetracking rachota.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US timetracker -> time tracker, time-tracker, racetrack rachota.src: W: invalid-url Source0: rachota.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. rpmlint rachota-javadoc-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc17.noarch.rpm rachota-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. End Package Review ============== ------------------ PACKAGE APPROVED -------------------
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: rachota Short Description: Straightforward timetracking Owners: wilqu Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC: java-sig
Git done (by process-git-requests). Jonathan, please take ownership of review BZs. Thanks!
rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc16
rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc15
rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository.
rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
rachota-2.3-3.20120110cvs.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.