Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 179541
Summary: | Review Request: tinyfugue: A MU* client | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Callum Lerwick <seg> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | John Mahowald <jpmahowald> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-extras-list, kevin, psabata, susi.lehtola |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | gwync:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-02-28 22:08:52 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Callum Lerwick
2006-02-01 07:50:23 UTC
Builds in mock, looking pretty good so far, though I can't sponsor. Blocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR. However, one thing that can be cleaned up, don't use Epoch unless you have to. I'm confused about that. I swear I read something ~1 year ago in the Fedora packaging guidelines somewhere about how setting Epoch: 0 was a good idea, but its not there anymore. Might have been a core thing? Bleh. I'll nuke it. New srpm and spec, with epoch removed: http://www.haxxed.com/rpms/tinyfugue.spec http://www.haxxed.com/rpms/tinyfugue-5.0-0.2.b7.src.rpm You may have seen older fedora.us guidlines. Good: - rpmlint checks clean - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file APPROVED. I have since become a sponsor, so send me your Fedora account info. I'd like to get an EPEL branch for this package and am willing to maintain it. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: tinyfugue New Branches: EL-5 Owners: jussilehtola Have you asked the current fedora maintainer if they would like to maintain it in EPEL? (In reply to comment #6) > Have you asked the current fedora maintainer if they would like to maintain it > in EPEL? I did so twice in bug #457401, no answer. The maintainer seems to be mostly away in any case; perhaps you'd also consider offering to co-maintain the package in Fedora. CVS done. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: tinyfugue New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: psabata Git done (by process-git-requests). el6 exists. Right. Thanks! |