Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-java - A boo plugin for monodevelop
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551912
Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-java - A boo plugin for monodevelop Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
SRPM URL: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/fedora/monodevelop-java-2.2-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: This is a simple Java plugin for monodevelop
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=551912
Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |monodevelop-java - A boo |monodevelop-java - A java |plugin for monodevelop |plugin for monodevelop
--- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org 2010-01-15 13:36:21 EST --- Please be so kind as to post the spec URL.
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=551912
--- Comment #2 from Paul F. Johnson paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2010-01-17 09:17:47 EST --- SPEC : http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/fedora/monodevelop-java.spec
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=551912
Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |chkr@plauener.de AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |chkr@plauener.de Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2010-01-24 13:06:43 EST --- I've roughly scanned over the package and I've seen a couple of issues. It would be good if they could be fixed first before I do the full complete review:
- source files differ from upstream and the source URL does not match the link on the download page: http://ftp.novell.com/pub/mono/sources/monodevelop-java/monodevelop-java-2.2...
- License: it looks like that the source files and the COPYING file points to GPLv2+ instead of MIT - please can you check this?
- package does not build (x86_64): Looking for required packages Checking for package 'mono-addins'.. found. Checking for package 'gtk-sharp-2.0'.. ERROR: Package named 'gtk-sharp-2.0' >= 2.12.8 not found. Try adjusting your PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable. error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.d20ndr (%build) RPM build errors:
- directory %{_libdir}/monodevelop/AddIns/JavaBinding must be packaged
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=551912
--- Comment #4 from Paul F. Johnson paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2010-01-24 17:37:51 EST --- SRPM URL: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/fedora/monodevelop-java-2.2-2.fc13.src.rpm SPEC : http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/fedora/monodevelop-java.spec
Fixes above issues
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=551912
--- Comment #5 from Paul F. Johnson paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2010-02-02 15:03:33 EST --- SRPM URL: http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/fedora/monodevelop-java-2.2-3.fc13.src.rpm SPEC : http://www.all-the-johnsons.co.uk/fedora/monodevelop-java.spec
Fixes the above and gettext issues
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=551912
--- Comment #6 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2010-02-09 17:49:15 EST --- I've looked at the new package and I've observed the following issues:
1. This packages suffers from the same problem with the moved locales as monodevelop-boo: The translations are not found anymore at all. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551911#c5
2. There are a couple of minor rpmlint warnings (typos, tabs vs. spaces, ...) (no-binary, no-documentation, configure-... etc. are false positives, they don't need to be fixed)
Please can you fix both of the problems before I do the full official review? Thanks!
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=551912
Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz elsupergomez@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |elsupergomez@gmail.com
--- Comment #7 from Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz elsupergomez@gmail.com 2010-06-18 20:02:56 EDT --- I repackage monodevelop-java to update upstream version 2.4
Spec URL: http://elsupergomez.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/monodevelop-java.spec SRPM URL: http://elsupergomez.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/monodevelop-java-2.4-1.fc13.src.r...
Please review
FE-NEEDSPONSOR
Thanks!
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=551912
--- Comment #8 from Paul F. Johnson paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2010-06-19 20:03:54 EDT --- #7 : Is this based on my srpm?
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=551912
--- Comment #9 from Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz elsupergomez@gmail.com 2010-07-28 07:34:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8)
#7 : Is this based on my srpm?
Yes!, is based on your srpm.
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=551912
Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(paul@all-the-john | |sons.co.uk)
--- Comment #10 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2011-06-07 16:43:56 EDT --- Paul, are you still interested getting this package reviewed?
Claudio, if you want to take over this review, I think the best way would be if you create a new Review Request.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org