Spec URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery.spec SRPM URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.1-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: toscawidgets2 (tw2) aims to be a practical and useful widgets framework that helps people build interactive websites with compelling features, faster and easier. Widgets are re-usable web components that can include a template, server-side code and JavaScripts/CSS resources. The library aims to be: flexible, reliable, documented, performant, and as simple as possible. jQuery is a fast and concise JavaScript Library that simplifies HTML document traversing, event handling, animating, and Ajax interactions for rapid web development. jQuery is designed to change the way that you write JavaScript. This module, tw2.jquery, provides toscawidgets2 (tw2) access to the jQuery library, a namespace package for jQuery plugins, and convenience classes for creating these plugins. ---- This package requires the following two packages which are currently in review: python-tw2-core https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720818 python-tw2-forms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811689
I got the summary wrong in the initial spec. Here is a second release. Spec URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery.spec SRPM URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.1-2.fc17.src.rpm
And python-tw2-jquery was accidentally installing its test suite alongside itself which collided with python-tw2-jqplugins-ui's tests. Here's an upstream change that fixes that. Spec URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery.spec SRPM URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-1.fc17.src.rpm
Another release that mostly removes references to builtroot and defattr Spec URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery.spec SRPM URL: http://threebean.org/rpm/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.fc17.src.rpm
A question came up in #fedora-devel as to whether or not we can bundle javascript intended to be served by a web app. There is an explicit exemption in the packaging guidelines making this "OK". http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_libraries
[nhorman@neilslaptop Downloads]$ rpmlint ./python-tw2-jquery.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [nhorman@neilslaptop Downloads]$ rpmlint python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.fc17.src.rpm python-tw2-jquery.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C jQuery for ToscaWidgets2 python-tw2-jquery.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US performant -> perform ant, perform-ant, performance python-tw2-jquery.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US namespace -> name space, name-space, names pace 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. rpmlint checks pass, warnings get a pass from me, as the spelling errors are false-positives and jQuery is a proper noun. I'll do the detailed list in just a bit.
MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1] Check MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . Check MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] . Check MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines . Check MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines . Check MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [3] Check 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 must be included in %doc.[4] Check MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] Check MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6] Check MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. Check MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [7] Check MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8] Check MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. Check MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9] Nak - Appears there might be some strings that need internationalization MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10] N/A MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11] Check MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [12] Check, no relocation needed MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [13] Check MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14] Check MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [15] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16] Check MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17] Check MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [18] N/A MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [18] Check MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [19] N/A MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [20] N/A MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [21] N/A MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built.[19] N/A MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a %.desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. %[22] N/A MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. [23] Check MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24] Check
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. [25] N/A SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [26] N/A SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [27] Check SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [28] Check SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. Unknown - Unable to check SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [29] N/A SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [21] N/A SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [30] N/A SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [31] N/A SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense.[32] N/A
I think the only thing we need to cover here are translations for non-english languages. Once thats square, I can approve this
I'm a little confused. I'm not aware of any translations into non english languages of any parts of the upstream package. Can you be a little more specific?
I'm referring to this: MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9] I was under the impression that part of the requirement was that we create the locale files so that strings could be translated after packaging
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files I interpret the above section to mean that %find_lang is only necessary if the upstream package already contains locale files. The packager must handle locale files with %find_lang, not by declaring %{_datadir}/locale/* in the %files section. python-tw2-jquery doesn't have any locale files to begin with. To generate them, the upstream package would have to be internationalized, which would be a major effort.
Ok, I can get behind that, especially since it seems to be the set precedent (I've sampled other python packages, and they seem to agree with your interpretation). So ACK from me on this.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-tw2-jquery Short Description: jQuery for ToscaWidgets2 Owners: ralph Branches: f17 el6 InitialCC:
Thank you for the review, Neil.
Git done (by process-git-requests).
python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.fc17
python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.el6
python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.
python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
python-tw2-jquery-2.0.2-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-tw2-jquery New Branches: epel7 Owners: ralph InitialCC: