[Bug 2279333] New: Review Request: elementary-greeter - LightDM Login Screen for the elementary desktop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
Bug ID: 2279333 Summary: Review Request: elementary-greeter - LightDM Login Screen for the elementary desktop Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: decathorpe@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/elementary-greeter.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3...
Description: The elementary Greeter is a styled Login Screen for LightDM.
Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #1 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=117345012
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1512217 | |(PantheonDesktopPackageRevi | |ews) Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512217 [Bug 1512217] Tracking: Pantheon Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://github.com/elementa | |ry/greeter
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7420361 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Found issues:
- A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/elementary-greeter Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicti...
Please know that there can be false-positives.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |code@musicinmybrain.net
--- Comment #3 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- Is there a specific reason for using the “traditional” snapshot versioning style
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_snaps...
Version: 7.0.0 Release: 2.%{commitdate}.git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
rather than the current style?
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_snaps...
Version: 7.0.0^%{commitdate}git%{shortcommit} Release: 2%{?dist}
I also notice that, while the guidelines for the old snapshot information field in the release only have “suggested” formats,
- YYYYMMDD.<revision> - YYYYMMDD<scm><revision>
the ones for the new snapshot information field in the version say one of the following formats “should” be followed:
- <date>.<revision> - <date><scm><revision> - <number>.<revision> - <number>.<scm><revision>
%{commitdate}.git%{shortcommit}%{?dist} is <date>.<scm><revision>, which doesn’t exactly match any of these formats.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com ---
Is there a specific reason for using the “traditional” snapshot versioning style rather than the current style?
Two "minor" reasons: I find the "old" snapshot versioning style without rpmautospec easier to get right. It's also consistent with other elementary project snapshots that I'm working on right now.
%{commitdate}.git%{shortcommit}%{?dist} is <date>.<scm><revision>, which doesn’t exactly match any of these formats.
Correct. Though IMO it's an oversight that this is not a documented format. I find 20240513.gitabc4567 much more readable than 20240513gitabc4567 (and I'm pretty sure only the one *with* the dot sorts correctly wrt/ RPM sorting, in the rare cases where this matters).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #5 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- Well, technically the guidelines say that the old style is deprecated but “MAY” be used, and the specific snapshot information field formats are “suggested,” so I guess if this works that much better for you then that’s OK.
I will probably review this, but I’m not going to officially assign it to myself until I have time to do it, in case someone else gets to it first.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #6 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- The fedora-review template notes that this fails to install:
DEBUG util.py:461: - nothing provides elementary-theme-gtk3 needed by elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3ff7809.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline DEBUG util.py:461: - nothing provides elementary-wallpapers needed by elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3ff7809.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline DEBUG util.py:461: - nothing provides pantheon-session-settings >= 30.90 needed by elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3ff7809.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline
Are these awaiting review somewhere?
I suppose this could be reviewed without its runtime dependencies, but it doesn’t make sense to build it until it would be installable.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #7 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- Just adding a note that this is a re-review for unretirement of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/elementary-greeter.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #8 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #6)
The fedora-review template notes that this fails to install:
DEBUG util.py:461: - nothing provides elementary-theme-gtk3 needed by elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3ff7809.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline DEBUG util.py:461: - nothing provides elementary-wallpapers needed by elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3ff7809.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline DEBUG util.py:461: - nothing provides pantheon-session-settings >= 30.90 needed by elementary-greeter-7.0.0-2.20240402.git3ff7809.fc41.x86_64 from @commandline
Are these awaiting review somewhere?
I suppose this could be reviewed without its runtime dependencies, but it doesn’t make sense to build it until it would be installable.
Damn, it looks like I missed these. Sorry about that. Not sure how this slipped through the cracks, basically all mock builds I do locally use "--postinstall".
So this is not ready until I manage to file re-review requests for those three packages too.
Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com has canceled Package Review package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org's request for Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com's needinfo: Bug 2279333: Review Request: elementary-greeter - LightDM Login Screen for the elementary desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
--- Comment #10 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- I am still working on this, however packaging elementary-greeter is now blocked by upstream work to support mutter 48: https://github.com/elementary/greeter/issues/790
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2279333
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whiteboard| |NotReady Flags|needinfo?(decathorpe@gmail. | |com) |
--- Comment #10 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- I am still working on this, however packaging elementary-greeter is now blocked by upstream work to support mutter 48: https://github.com/elementary/greeter/issues/790
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com