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
Bug 1149289 - Review Request: telepathy-qt - High-level bindings for Telepathy
Summary: Review Request: telepathy-qt - High-level bindings for Telepathy
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2014-10-03 16:32 UTC by Rex Dieter
Modified: 2016-08-14 16:27 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: telepathy-qt-0.9.5-2.fc21
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2014-10-12 13:55:27 UTC
Type: ---
jgrulich: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rex Dieter 2014-10-03 16:32:54 UTC
Spec URL:
Telepathy-qt are high level bindings for Telepathy and provides both
the low level 1:1 auto generated API, and a high-level API build
on top of that, in the same library.

Fedora Account System Username: rdieter

Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2014-10-03 16:44:55 UTC
Improvements over the existing telepathy-qt4 fedpkg module include:

* Fri Oct 03 2014 Rex Dieter <rdieter> 0.9.5-2
- bump deps for newer farstream/gst1
- Qt5 support
- rename base pkg to telepathy-qt (to match upstream), but...
- keep subpkg names the same (telepathy-qt4), for simple/obvious upgrade path

Comment 2 Jan Grulich 2014-10-03 17:47:13 UTC
Package Review

[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
  Note: Package has .a files: telepathy-qt4-devel, telepathy-qt5-devel. Does
  not provide -static: telepathy-qt4-devel, telepathy-qt5-devel.
- Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB)
  or number of files.
  Note: Documentation size is 5079040 bytes in 12 files.

===== MUST items =====

[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 166 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/cmake(qt5-qtbase-
     devel, kdevelop-pg-qt-devel, pulseaudio-libs-devel, phonon-qt5-devel,
     phonon-devel, grantlee-devel, cmake)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
     supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
     in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
     for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
     in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

[ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
     from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in telepathy-
     qt4 , telepathy-qt4-devel , telepathy-qt4-farstream , telepathy-qt5 ,
     telepathy-qt5-devel , telepathy-qt5-farstream
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

[ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 5079040 bytes in /usr/share
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Checking: telepathy-qt4-0.9.5-2.fc20.x86_64.rpm
telepathy-qt4-farstream.x86_64: W: no-documentation
telepathy-qt5-farstream.x86_64: W: no-documentation
7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Comment 3 Jan Grulich 2014-10-03 17:53:35 UTC
Looks good to me and I don't see any major issue. Having -doc or -static subpackages is not necessary. Anyway this is just a renamed package extended with a build for Qt5 which means it was already reviewed once so I'm sure it could be approved.

Comment 4 Rex Dieter 2014-10-03 18:19:07 UTC

New Package SCM Request
Package Name: telepathy-qt
Short Description: High-devel bindings for Telepathy
Upstream URL:
Owners: jreznik rdieter jgrulich mck182 rnovacek
Branches: f21

Comment 5 Rex Dieter 2014-10-03 18:19:29 UTC
typo alert, lets try again

New Package SCM Request
Package Name: telepathy-qt
Short Description: High-level bindings for Telepathy
Upstream URL:
Owners: jreznik rdieter jgrulich mck182 rnovacek
Branches: f21

Comment 6 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-10-06 12:36:40 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 7 Rex Dieter 2014-10-06 13:01:40 UTC
imported, thanks.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2014-10-06 14:38:27 UTC
telepathy-qt-0.9.5-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2014-10-08 19:17:07 UTC
telepathy-qt-0.9.5-2.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2014-10-12 13:55:27 UTC
telepathy-qt-0.9.5-2.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.