Review Guidelines missing entry

[Toshio Kuratomi]

I just noticed that although checking for static libraries is listed on:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines

Checking for Bundled libraries isn't:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_li...

I'm going to add that as it's just a clarification rather than a change
in Guidelines.  If someone objects, holler and I can revert until the
next FPC meeting.

-Toshio

[Susi Lehtola]

Quoting "Toshio Kuratomi" :
> I just noticed that although checking for static libraries is listed on:
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
>
> Checking for Bundled libraries isn't:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_li...
>
> I'm going to add that as it's just a clarification rather than a change
> in Guidelines.  If someone objects, holler and I can revert until the
> next FPC meeting.

Sure, but don't the Review Guidelines already include the Packaging  
Guidelines? Thus we don't need to re-list everything in the Review  
Guidelines.

btw, is
  %defattr(-,root,root)
really the same thing as
  %defattr(-,root,root,-)

In either case, this really should be added somewhere as at least many  
RH people use it.

[Orcan Ogetbil]

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> I just noticed that although checking for static libraries is listed on:
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
>
> Checking for Bundled libraries isn't:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_li...
>
> I'm going to add that as it's just a clarification rather than a change
> in Guidelines.  If someone objects, holler and I can revert until the
> next FPC meeting.

Another incomplete entry:

-----
> From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines

MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your
packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a
comment in the spec file with your explanation
-----
and from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files

If a package contains a GUI application, then it needs to also include
a properly installed .desktop file.
-----

Both statements are ill-defined for packages that install multiple GUI
applications. A packager can install only 1 .desktop file for his
package which contains 3 GUI applications and he can say that he
obeyed all the guidelines. And unfortunately, he is right; the
guidelines do not force him to install more than 1 .desktop file.

Orcan

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le vendredi 12 juin 2009 à 10:32 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> I just noticed that although checking for static libraries is listed on:
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
>
> Checking for Bundled libraries isn't:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_li...
>
> I'm going to add that as it's just a clarification rather than a change
> in Guidelines.  If someone objects, holler and I can revert until the
> next FPC meeting.

Since adding a line to check for fonts and apply corresponding
guidelines was refused on the ground that the review check list is
already too long, and reviewers should know packaging guidelines, I
object to this addition.

Please be consistent.

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On 06/12/2009 02:37 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le vendredi 12 juin 2009 à 10:32 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> > I just noticed that although checking for static libraries is listed on:
> >   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
> >
> > Checking for Bundled libraries isn't:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_li...
> >
> > I'm going to add that as it's just a clarification rather than a change
> > in Guidelines.  If someone objects, holler and I can revert until the
> > next FPC meeting.
>
> Since adding a line to check for fonts and apply corresponding
> guidelines was refused on the ground that the review check list is
> already too long, and reviewers should know packaging guidelines, I
> object to this addition.

We don't have any of the Application Specific Guidelines listed there so
not listing a font checklist item is consistent:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Application_Specific_Gui...

Change reverted until the FPC Meeting.

-Toshio

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le vendredi 12 juin 2009 à 17:03 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> We don't have any of the Application Specific Guidelines listed there so
> not listing a font checklist item is consistent:

Please review FPC deliberations at the time
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Minutes/20090203#t11:29

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le samedi 13 juin 2009 à 11:27 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit :
> Le vendredi 12 juin 2009 à 17:03 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> > We don't have any of the Application Specific Guidelines listed there so
> > not listing a font checklist item is consistent:
>
> Please review FPC deliberations at the time
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Minutes/20090203#t11:29

Clarified here
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Minutes/20090217#t11:23

You're "adding to the sea of rules" and a "type-specific
guideline" (library)