[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-10-15 15:32:21 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2020-d6d3c26122 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2020-d6d3c26122 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-d6d3c26122 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hexchat-autoaway -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647 --- Comment #4 from Ding-Yi Chen --- Thanks you, Robert-Andre. #fedpkg request-repo hexchat-autoaway 1860647 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/29137 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST QA Contact|extras...@fedoraproject.org |zebo...@gmail.com Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin --- >> - Consider adding a comment above the patch to explain what it is doing. > The patch is generated by GitHub pull request. Thus the filename is > .patch > To make up for it, I put the summary of the patch as comment in spec. You can rename any file you like by adding #/ at the end: ## Upstream PR#3 "feat(away-nick-suffix): append away suffix to nickname" Patch0: https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/andreyv/hexchat-autoaway/pull/3.patch#/0001-append-away-suffix-to-nickname.patch Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647
--- Comment #2 from Ding-Yi Chen ---
Spec URL: https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/hexchat-autoaway.spec
SRPM URL:
https://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/hexchat-autoaway-2.0-2.el8.src.rpm
- Consider giving a more explicit name to your patch (by appending
#/name-of-the-patch.patch for example)
- Consider adding a comment above the patch to explain what it is doing.
The patch is generated by GitHub pull request. Thus the filename is
.patch
To make up for it, I put the summary of the patch as comment in spec.
- Please use the new CMake out of source building:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_to_do_out-of-source_builds
So far, my EL8 box does not have all the macros. I have to use:
%{?!_vpath_builddir:%define _vpath_builddir %{_target_platform}} and mkdir
-p %_vpath_builddir
- (Use cmake3 if you want EPEL7 compatibility, otherwise just use %cmake)
Done
- Add an explicit BR for cmake
Done
- Add an explicit BR for gcc-c++
Done
- Don't mix tabs and spaces:
Fixed
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1860647] Review Request: hexchat-autoaway - HexChat plugin that automatically mark you away
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860647
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Consider giving a more explicit name to your patch (by appending
#/name-of-the-patch.patch for example)
- Consider adding a comment above the patch to explain what it is doing.
- Please use the new CMake out of source building:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_to_do_out-of-source_builds
BuildRequires: cmake
[…]
%build
%{cmake}
%cmake_build
%install
%cmake_install
(Use cmake3 if you want EPEL7 compatibility, otherwise just use %cmake)
- Add an explicit BR for cmake
BuildRequires: cmake
- Add an explicit BR for gcc-c++
BuildRequires: gcc-c++
- Don't mix tabs and spaces:
hexchat-autoaway.src:1: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab:
line 1)
i.e. no tabs on line 1 and line 11.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[!]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[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", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
later". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck
in /home/bob/packaging/review/hexchat-autoaway/review-hexchat-
autoaway/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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[!]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[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]: 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
