Bug 995995 - Review Request: lunar-date - Chinese lunar date library
Review Request: lunar-date - Chinese lunar date library
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
unspecified Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
AwaitingSubmitter
:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2013-08-12 03:18 EDT by Mike Manilone
Modified: 2014-07-14 22:45 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-07-14 22:45:45 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Mike Manilone 2013-08-12 03:18:50 EDT
Spec URL: http://people.midymidy.com/~ekd123/RPM/lunar-date.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.midymidy.com/~ekd123/RPM/lunar-date-2.4.0-1.fc19.src.rpm
Description:

A feature-complete GLib-based library for Chinese lunar date conversion.

Fedora Account System Username: unixekd123
Comment 1 Christopher Meng 2013-08-12 05:05:10 EDT
1.This is not the latest version. 

2. Have you tested its usability? This package has been packaged by myself for a long time, but because its upstream is dead, I'm not sure if it's useful.
Comment 2 Mike Manilone 2013-08-12 05:34:52 EDT
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #1)
> 1.This is not the latest version. 
http://code.google.com/p/liblunar/ shows that this is the latest one.

> 
> 2. Have you tested its usability? This package has been packaged by myself
> for a long time, but because its upstream is dead, I'm not sure if it's
> useful.
https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/675/lunar-calendar/ depends on it.
Comment 3 Christopher Meng 2013-08-12 06:50:08 EDT
I can find 3.0 version.
Comment 4 Mike Manilone 2013-08-12 07:34:27 EDT
Nope, that's lunar-calendar, a graphical library targetting Gtk+3, while lunar-date is a low-level library for date conversion.
Comment 5 Michael Schwendt 2013-09-09 11:54:11 EDT
Have rpmlint and/or "fedora-review -b 995995" been run for this one yet?


> %files data
> %dir %{_datadir}/liblunar
> %{_datadir}/liblunar/*

  %files data
  %{_datadir}/liblunar/

would be shorter and achieves the same. 

Btw, here the subpackage includes only three tiny files, each below 1KB, and the base package even strictly depends on this package. Is that really enough reason to introduce a noarch subpackage?


> %package        docs

The guidelines recommend -doc not -docs:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation

The subpackage is 14788 bytes long. I would keep it in the -devel package.

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