On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Till Maas <opensource(a)till.name> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 09:55:25PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 21:35:27 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > I noticed that several packages do not contain a URL tag and
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#tags
> > does not require it. IMHO it would be nicer to have a valid URL tag for
> > all packages. Therefore I want to propose to make it mandatory.
> > What are your opinions?
> Both the package submitter and the reviewer, who approved
> package, should be pointed at:
> | MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms
> | the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.
> rpmlint warns about a missing URL tag.
I did not check why it happened. The packages from the following SRPM do
not seem to have the URL tag:
why should this package need a source or URL?
We have seen issues with font upstream sources. When packages got added
into Fedora they of course used to have correct and valid upstream source
as well as URL. But as time goes these URL seems to vanish.
Looks like now source is also not able to be downloaded
This looks like not requested any fedorahosted trac wiki, so there looks no
This is a filesystem package so don't think any source or URL will exists
Does your script checks for actual URL lines in SPEC that got commented?
The reason I have purposefully commented URL line is because upstream was
dead and I want to keep url for my reference as it was committed in initial
release. Do you got any recommendations for fixing this issue?
This is very old package in Fedora and whatever I can see about this
package, it never saw any URL and used sources from some website's download
space. That reminds me its merge review is still open as there is no trace
This is also old package with source hosted at http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/
Can then this use URL as http://www.ibiblio.org
This looks have its own upstream not hosted anywhere.
I have still not found any URL for this Google fonts project.
Another old package. This was also not having any URL but source was hosted
on some website which is already dead now.
This uses various sources with some having URL link commented above source
lines in spec.
Following is already in SPEC but if both URL is gone, can you suggest what
can be done to enable URL tag for this?
# Looks like currently following URL is gone now. Maybe temporary issue
# Try following URL for this package
Another filesystem package
Its clearly written in spec
## the following upstream URL is a dead link anymore.
This looks another filesystem package which should not be having any URL
This is just single text file source with no upstream needed.
This is another package with source hosted on people page on some website.
The comment inside spec clearly mentioned its Red Hat maintained package
and source will be available from srpm. Let me see if I can add it to
fedorahosted and then its links in spec
Duplicate in this list
We can uncomment the dead URL in
spec files but then what to do if someone
reports bug saying URL is not working? Close it as NOTABUG or WONTFIX?