ps

To honor the right person, the first version of this specfile was posted to
fedora-extras by "Michael D. Wise" <micwise>.

I would like to see this in Extras too.
I will probably review later tonight or tomorrow if someone doesn't do so before me.

One important notice, this package needs libgsf 1.13.2 or higher. Core is still
at 1.12.3 , and Core is not planning an upgrade soon (bug 172062).

To fix this problem I've create a seperate (paralalel installable) libgsf113
package please review that first, bug 174266. Also you need to have that package
build and installed (including devel). Before you can build this one.

While I'm doing a dump of my grey matter, if you want to build any packages
using goffice they will probably need (because they also need gsf113):
export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=%{_libdir}/libgsf-1.13/lib/pkgconfig
before %configure

Maybe I should put this in libgsf113-devel description?

(In reply to comment #3)
> One important notice, this package needs libgsf 1.13.2 or higher. Core is still
> at 1.12.3 , and Core is not planning an upgrade soon (bug 172062).
> 
> To fix this problem I've create a seperate (paralalel installable) libgsf113
> package please review that first, bug 174266. Also you need to have that package
> build and installed (including devel). Before you can build this one.
> 

Ah - OK.
I was wondering where libgsf113 was ...

In the mean time - a couple of comments about this package:

Needs Fixin:
Source0 does not full url

ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/sources/goffice/0.1/goffice-0.1.2.tar.bz2
Two unowned directories:

%{_libdir}/goffice
%{_datadir}/goffice

(In reply to comment #4)
> While I'm doing a dump of my grey matter, if you want to build any packages
> using goffice they will probably need (because they also need gsf113):
> export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=%{_libdir}/libgsf-1.13/lib/pkgconfig
> before %configure
> 
> Maybe I should put this in libgsf113-devel description?
> 

I think a README.fedora (in the libgsf113-devel package) would be better than in
the %description.

Created attachment 121551 [details]
improved specfile

-Make Source0 a full URL
-Better URL tag
-Fix not owning /usr/lib(64)/goffice and /usr/share/goffice

* builds in mock, rpmlint clean:
[mpeters@utility result]$ ls *.rpm && rpmlint *.rpm
goffice-0.1.2-2.i386.rpm  goffice-debuginfo-0.1.2-2.i386.rpm
goffice-0.1.2-2.src.rpm   goffice-devel-0.1.2-2.i386.rpm
W: goffice-devel no-documentation
[mpeters@utility result]$

* md5sum matches upstream
* written in understandable americam english
* proper hangling of lang files
* proper files in devel package, no .la archives
* proper BuildRequires, proper explicit Requires in devel package
* OSS license, packaged with %doc
* proper use of scriptlets
* proper use of macros
* proper %clean

APPROVED

After import it turned out that there were some dependencies missing causing the
buildsys build to use the gtk instead of gnome UI, I have fixed this and
requested a new build which has completed sucessfully.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: goffice
New Branches: EL-5
Updated Fedora Owners: add notting as co-maintainer
Updated EPEL Owners: notting <main>, j.w.r.degoede <co-maintainer>
Updated EPEL CC:

I've requested goffice for EPEL as I have a package in EPEL 5 that needs it.
I'll be a co-maintainer for Fedora so I can see if/when I need to pull changes back.

cvs done.