[Bug 226301] New: Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

Summary: Merge Review: planner
           Product: Fedora Extras
           Version: devel
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: normal
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail]

Fedora Merge Review: planner

http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/planner/
Initial Owner: [e-mail]

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

Jon Ciesla  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]

--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla   2008-09-17 12:32:09 EDT ---
rpmlint on SRPM: clean

rpmlint on RPMS:

planner.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/planner.schemas
A non-executable file in your package is being installed in /etc, but is not a
configuration file. All non-executable files in /etc should be configuration
files. Mark the file as %config in the spec file.

Probably ok?

planner.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided mrproject
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

planner.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided libmrproject
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

planner.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided libmrproject-devel
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

Fix.

planner-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

planner-eds.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

I have to think there's SOMETHING you could move over to these from the main
package?

planner-eds.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/evolution-data-server-1.2/extensions/libecalbackendplanner.so
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.

Is this a false positive?  If so, file an rpmlint bug.

Otherwise, full review looks good, no other blockers.

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla   2008-12-09 16:16:22 EDT ---
Reviewed 0.14.3-7, same as above.

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

Jon Ciesla  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla   2008-12-10 09:02:02 EDT ---
Re-adding planner maintainer.

Caolan, please do not remove yourself from this review again without adding a
planner co-maintainer that has agreed to work on it.

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla   2009-03-31 11:24:34 EDT ---
Ping?

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #5 from Caolan McNamara   2009-04-01 05:36:15 EDT ---
Hmm, apparently I still own this, thought I handed it over, probably got mixed
up with dia.

Anyway (planner-0.14.3-11.fc11) removed the old obsoletes in line with current
recommendations to get rid of them after X releases

The planner.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/planner.schemas
warning is ok

The planner-eds.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package warning is fixed

The planner-eds.i386: W: and planner-devel.i386: W: no-documentation warnings
aren't fixed. Can't see what we could put in for -eds documentation, there just
isn't any

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla   2009-04-01 08:49:45 EDT ---
All sounds reasonable.  If the Obsoletes are gone, are the Provides needed?

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #7 from Caolan McNamara   2009-04-01 11:38:11 EDT ---
Should be no need for them either

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla   2009-04-01 11:55:29 EDT ---
Ok, drop them and I'll be happy.

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

--- Comment #9 from Caolan McNamara   2009-04-01 17:48:14 EDT ---
There's nothing to drop in planner-0.14.3-11.f11 right ?

[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301

Jon Ciesla  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |ERRATA
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla   2009-04-02 08:48:26 EDT ---
Ah. There isn't.

APPROVED.   Thanks!