https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
Bug ID: 1819072 Summary: Review Request: gnome-extensions-app - gnome-shell extensions management Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fmuellner@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~fmuellner/gnome-extensions-app.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~fmuellner/gnome-extensions-app-3.36.1-1.fc32.src.r... Description: GNOME Extensions is an application for configuring and removing GNOME Shell extensions. Fedora Account System Username: fmuellner
The history here is a bit weird: - gnome-shell-extensions-prefs has been part of the gnome-shell package for ages, but wasn't user-visible until 3.36.0 - in 3.36.0, it was still build as part of gnome-shell, but put into a subpackage - for 3.36.1, we (Kalev and I) decided that a separate package would be preferable, as it makes building a Fedora flatpak easier
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |klember@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |klember@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
--- Comment #1 from Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com --- Packaging looks nice and clean. Some notes:
$ rpmlint gnome-extensions-app-3.36.1-1.fc32.src.rpm \ gnome-extensions-app-3.36.1-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
gnome-extensions-app.src:20: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 20, tab: line 4) gnome-extensions-app.x86_64: W: no-documentation gnome-extensions-app.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-shell-extension-prefs 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Can you fix the mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs warning from above?
License: GPLv3+
Is GPLv3+ correct? README and COPYING seem to indicate it's GPL version 2.
Can you add appdata validation as per https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/#_app_data... ?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
--- Comment #2 from Florian Müllner fmuellner@redhat.com --- (In reply to Kalev Lember from comment #1)
Packaging looks nice and clean. Some notes:
$ rpmlint gnome-extensions-app-3.36.1-1.fc32.src.rpm \ gnome-extensions-app-3.36.1-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
Meh, I should have thought of running that myself.
gnome-extensions-app.src:20: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 20, tab: line 4)
Fixed.
gnome-extensions-app.x86_64: W: no-documentation gnome-extensions-app.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-shell-extension-prefs
Any chance to shut those up? I'm not going to waste time adding a man page for a graphical application ...
(I know you didn't ask me to fix those, just curious)
License: GPLv3+
Is GPLv3+ correct? README and COPYING seem to indicate it's GPL version 2.
Yikes, good catch. gnome-extensions-tool is GPL3, and that's the spec I copied because I had figured out the building-from-subproject stuff.
Fixed.
Can you add appdata validation as per https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/ #_app_data_validate_usage ?
Done.
I guess an alternative would be to run %meson_check (which performs that check if appstream-util is available)?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fmuellner@redhat.com Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com --- (In reply to Florian Müllner from comment #2)
(In reply to Kalev Lember from comment #1)
gnome-extensions-app.x86_64: W: no-documentation gnome-extensions-app.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-shell-extension-prefs
Any chance to shut those up? I'm not going to waste time adding a man page for a graphical application ...
(I know you didn't ask me to fix those, just curious)
There's $pkgname.rpmlintrc these days but I've never tried to use it myself. It's probably a good idea to set this up in order to filter out false positives from the automatic rpmlint tests that show up in bodhi.
I guess an alternative would be to run %meson_check (which performs that check if appstream-util is available)?
Sure, that makes sense to me.
Everything looks good to me now! Thanks.
APPROVED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
--- Comment #4 from Florian Müllner fmuellner@redhat.com --- (In reply to Kalev Lember from comment #3)
(In reply to Florian Müllner from comment #2)
I guess an alternative would be to run %meson_check (which performs that check if appstream-util is available)?
Sure, that makes sense to me.
OK, I'll change that.
(not that it matter, as that's the only check meson_check does right now)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-extensions-app
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1819072
Florian Müllner fmuellner@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2020-03-31 21:00:44
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org