Bug 1708433 (kf5-kipi-plugins) - Review Request: kf5-kipi-plugins - Plugins to use with kf5-libkipi applications
Summary: Review Request: kf5-kipi-plugins - Plugins to use with kf5-libkipi applications
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: kf5-kipi-plugins
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends On:
Blocks: kde-reviews
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-05-09 21:16 UTC by Rex Dieter
Modified: 2019-05-14 13:27 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

(edit)
Clone Of:
(edit)
Last Closed: 2019-05-14 13:27:13 UTC
zebob.m: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rex Dieter 2019-05-09 21:16:35 UTC
Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kf5/kf5-kipi-plugins.spec
SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kf5/kf5-kipi-plugins-5.9.1-1.fc30.src.rpm
Description: This package contains plugins to use with Kipi, the KDE Image Plugin
Interface.
Fedora Account System Username: rdieter

Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2019-05-09 21:17:49 UTC
Scratch build,
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=34754199

Kipi plugins used to be distributed with digikam, but as of digikam-6.0 release, that is no more.  kipi-plugins are now provided seperately, hence, this review.

Comment 2 Robert-André Mauchin 2019-05-09 22:29:43 UTC
 - Add a Requires: hicolor-icon-theme to own the icons directories

 - Validate the desktop file:

- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
  file-validate if there is such a file.

 - Shouldn't you add Provides too:

kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided kipi-plugins
kf5-kipi-plugins-libs.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided kipi-plugins-libs

 - Convert the ChangeLog to UTF-8:

kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/kf5-kipi-plugins/ChangeLog



Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
  file-validate if there is such a file.


===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* BSD 3-clause "New" or
     "Revised" License", "GPL (v2 or later)", "*No copyright* Public
     domain", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "BSD 3-clause "New" or
     "Revised" License", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v2 or later)".
     1140 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/bob/packaging/review/kf5-kipi-plugins/review-kf5-kipi-
     plugins/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: 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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: 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]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     kf5-kipi-plugins-libs
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 15718400 bytes in /usr/share
     kf5-kipi-plugins-5.9.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm:15718400
     See:
     https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Guidelines
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: kf5-kipi-plugins-5.9.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm
          kf5-kipi-plugins-libs-5.9.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm
          kf5-kipi-plugins-debugsource-5.9.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm
          kf5-kipi-plugins-5.9.1-1.fc31.src.rpm
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libkipi -> lipid
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided kipi-plugins
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: E: no-binary
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/kf5-kipi-plugins/ChangeLog
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-facebook.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-flash.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-flickr.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-googlephoto.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-hq.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-imgur.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-piwigo.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: gzipped-svg-icon /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kipi-smugmug.svgz
kf5-kipi-plugins.x86_64: W: desktopfile-without-binary /usr/share/applications/kipiplugins.desktop ""
kf5-kipi-plugins-libs.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided kipi-plugins-libs
kf5-kipi-plugins-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kf5-kipi-plugins-libs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libKF5kipiplugins.so
kf5-kipi-plugins.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libkipi -> lipid
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 16 warnings.

Comment 3 Rex Dieter 2019-05-10 14:06:26 UTC
Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kf5/kf5-kipi-plugins.spec
SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kf5/kf5-kipi-plugins-5.9.1-2.fc30.src.rpm

%changelog
* Fri May 10 2019 Rex Dieter <rdieter@fedoraproject.org> - 5.9.1-2
- Requires: hicolor-icon-theme
- fix ChangeLog encoding
- validate kipiplugins.desktop
- add .spec comment clarifying purpose of Obsoletes: kipi-plugins (upgrade path only)

Comment 4 Robert-André Mauchin 2019-05-10 14:35:32 UTC
LGTM, package approved.

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2019-05-10 15:16:22 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kf5-kipi-plugins

Comment 6 Rex Dieter 2019-05-14 13:27:13 UTC
imported, thanks.


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