This package built on koji:  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=80150940

Looks good, tasks is syncing to my phone.

Some remarks below:

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


Issues:
=======
- Unnecessary versioned buildrequires
  - meson >= 0.49
    Last 3 Fedora versions all have meson 0.59.4 or newer, so this should be unversioned.
  - pkgconfig(granite) >= 6.2.0
    Last 3 Fedora versions all have granite 6.2.0, so this should be unversioned.
  - pkgconfig(libhandy-1) >= 0.90.0
    Last 3 Fedora versions all have libhandy 1.2.3 or newer, so this should be unversioned.

-  Duplicated icons
   The package duplicates all icons in /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*@2/ directories.
   Is this necessary, especially since they are svgs? Otherwise these should be symlinked to avoid wasting storage space.


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

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
     later", "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later". 426 files
     have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/arthur/fedora-review/2033890-elementary-tasks/licensecheck.txt
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2/apps,
     /usr/share/locale/mo, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2/apps,
     /usr/share/locale/mo/LC_MESSAGES, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners:
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2, /usr/share/locale/mo,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2/apps,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2/apps,
     /usr/share/locale/mo/LC_MESSAGES, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2,
     /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2/apps
[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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[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 %license.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
     desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

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

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint (manually)
------------------
elementary-tasks-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/io.elementary.tasks-6.1.0-1.fc36.x86_64.debug
elementary-tasks-debuginfo.x86_64: E: shared-library-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/io.elementary.tasks-6.1.0-1.fc36.x86_64.debug
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary io.elementary.tasks
elementary-tasks-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-documentation
elementary-tasks-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation
elementary-tasks.x86_64: E: invalid-lc-messages-dir /usr/share/locale/mo/LC_MESSAGES/io.elementary.tasks.mo
elementary-tasks.x86_64: E: files-duplicated-waste 171983
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128@2/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16@2/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24@2/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32@2/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48@2/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg
elementary-tasks.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64@2/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps/io.elementary.tasks.svg
elementary-tasks-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/dc/68175b2fa5bc068027cf8c0922e8bde7dd087e ../../../.build-id/dc/68175b2fa5bc068027cf8c0922e8bde7dd087e


Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/elementary/tasks/archive/6.1.0/elementary-tasks-6.1.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : bb562e080cabd821283ae8fdcd1d9e6b8bd3e49d85324a9aeb395b6cb57d49f6
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : bb562e080cabd821283ae8fdcd1d9e6b8bd3e49d85324a9aeb395b6cb57d49f6


Requires
--------
elementary-tasks (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    hicolor-icon-theme
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcairo.so.2()(64bit)
    libchamplain-0.12.so.0()(64bit)
    libchamplain-gtk-0.12.so.0()(64bit)
    libclutter-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libclutter-gtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libecal-2.0.so.1()(64bit)
    libedataserver-1.2.so.26()(64bit)
    libgdata.so.22()(64bit)
    libgdk-3.so.0()(64bit)
    libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libgee-0.8.so.2()(64bit)
    libgeoclue-2.so.0()(64bit)
    libgeocode-glib.so.0()(64bit)
    libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libgranite.so.6()(64bit)
    libgtk-3.so.0()(64bit)
    libhandy-1.so.0()(64bit)
    libhandy-1.so.0(LIBHANDY_1_0)(64bit)
    libical-glib.so.3()(64bit)
    libsoup-2.4.so.1()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

elementary-tasks-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

elementary-tasks-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
elementary-tasks:
    application()
    application(io.elementary.tasks.desktop)
    elementary-tasks
    elementary-tasks(x86-64)
    metainfo()
    metainfo(io.elementary.tasks.appdata.xml)

elementary-tasks-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    elementary-tasks-debuginfo
    elementary-tasks-debuginfo(x86-64)

elementary-tasks-debugsource:
    elementary-tasks-debugsource
    elementary-tasks-debugsource(x86-64)

> Issues:
> =======
> - Unnecessary versioned buildrequires
>   - meson >= 0.49
>     Last 3 Fedora versions all have meson 0.59.4 or newer, so this should be
> unversioned.
>   - pkgconfig(granite) >= 6.2.0
>     Last 3 Fedora versions all have granite 6.2.0, so this should be
> unversioned.
>   - pkgconfig(libhandy-1) >= 0.90.0
>     Last 3 Fedora versions all have libhandy 1.2.3 or newer, so this should
> be unversioned.

Is this really a problem?
I usually translate meson dev library requirements into BuildRequires 1:1 so I don't miss any constraints from upstream, so I'd like to keep them there.

> -  Duplicated icons
>    The package duplicates all icons in /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*@2/
> directories.
>    Is this necessary, especially since they are svgs? Otherwise these should
> be symlinked to avoid wasting storage space.

This *is* weird. I have asked upstream why they install icons for double pixel density if they are just duplicates, and that the hicolor icon theme apparently does not supprt @2 at all:
https://github.com/elementary/tasks/issues/321

> Is this really a problem?
> I usually translate meson dev library requirements into BuildRequires 1:1 so I don't miss any constraints from upstream, so I'd like to keep them there.

It's recommended (SHOULD) in the packaging guidelines [0], but since you have a decent justification, it's fine for me.

> This *is* weird. I have asked upstream why they install icons for double pixel density if they are just duplicates, and that the hicolor icon theme apparently does not supprt @2 at all:
> https://github.com/elementary/tasks/issues/321

I searched a bit further and it seems it's used for hi-resolution displays, but the way it's used here is wrong (I think). hicolor-icon-theme apparently does support @2, it's a bit vague in the spec [1] and I don't understand why they "fixed" it in 0.16 by adding it to the index.theme file but didn't change the build to create the directories... There also seems to be an oversight by adding arbitrary scaling support in the spec, but only supporting @2 and not @3...

GammaRay seems to do it correctly [2] and [3], but the directories are still not owned by anything. They use @2 and @3, but since hicolor-icon-theme only supports @2, I'm not sure if @3 would even do anything but wasting space.

Also, this issue is actually present for many elementary packages, but first let's see how this problem is solved upstream.

If you'd like the package to approved, I think it's fine to remove the @2 directories (since they are just the same icons and thus shouldn't do anything) and add a comment linking to the upstream issue.


[0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_package_dependencies
[1] https://specifications.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html
[2] https://github.com/KDAB/GammaRay/tree/master/ui/resources/gammaray
[3] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gammaray/blob/rawhide/f/gammaray.spec

(In reply to Arthur Bols from comment #5)
> > Is this really a problem?
> > I usually translate meson dev library requirements into BuildRequires 1:1 so I don't miss any constraints from upstream, so I'd like to keep them there.
> 
> It's recommended (SHOULD) in the packaging guidelines [0], but since you
> have a decent justification, it's fine for me.

Well, technically, the guidelines say "three previous Fedora releases", which would include Fedora 33, which does *not* satisfy all those requirements. ;)

> > This *is* weird. I have asked upstream why they install icons for double pixel density if they are just duplicates, and that the hicolor icon theme apparently does not supprt @2 at all:
> > https://github.com/elementary/tasks/issues/321
> 
> I searched a bit further and it seems it's used for hi-resolution displays,
> but the way it's used here is wrong (I think). hicolor-icon-theme apparently
> does support @2, it's a bit vague in the spec [1] and I don't understand why
> they "fixed" it in 0.16 by adding it to the index.theme file but didn't
> change the build to create the directories... There also seems to be an
> oversight by adding arbitrary scaling support in the spec, but only
> supporting @2 and not @3...

It seems that this was an oversight in the original patch that added @2 scaling support to index.theme:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/default-icon-theme/-/issues/2

(issue opened in 2018 by another Fedora packager ...)

> GammaRay seems to do it correctly [2] and [3], but the directories are still
> not owned by anything. They use @2 and @3, but since hicolor-icon-theme only
> supports @2, I'm not sure if @3 would even do anything but wasting space.
> 
> Also, this issue is actually present for many elementary packages, but first
> let's see how this problem is solved upstream.
> 
> If you'd like the package to approved, I think it's fine to remove the @2
> directories (since they are just the same icons and thus shouldn't do
> anything) and add a comment linking to the upstream issue.

You're right. I'll probably remove the NxN@2 icons for now and add these links:

https://github.com/elementary/tasks/issues/321
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/default-icon-theme/-/issues/2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537318
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hicolor-icon-theme/pull-request/2

===

Updated spec and SRPM behind the same URLs.

> Well, technically, the guidelines say "three previous Fedora releases", which would include Fedora 33, which does *not* satisfy all those requirements. ;)
Woops I was already counting Fedora 36.

> It seems that this was an oversight in the original patch that added @2 scaling support to index.theme:
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/default-icon-theme/-/issues/2
>
> (issue opened in 2018 by another Fedora packager ...)

That's unfortunate. :/ Maybe someone should patch the hicolor-icon-theme package?

> You're right. I'll probably remove the NxN@2 icons for now and add these links:
>
> https://github.com/elementary/tasks/issues/321
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/default-icon-theme/-/issues/2
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537318
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hicolor-icon-theme/pull-request/2

I replied here before there was an answer on the github issue. So apparently the @2 icons do have a use:
> The icons need to be in both directories just because of the way icon themes are set up. They're SVG but GTK will load a larger icon rather than scale unless they're specified like this as HiDPI icons
Removing them would diminish the experience for users with scaling a bit. You could do the effort to symlink all icons, but I don't want to force it upon you. You will be the maintainer, so I let you decide. :)

Package approved!

Yeah, I've pinged a few people on those bugs and PRs to get the hicolor-icon-theme package fixed, even if the upstream project has not been touched in over 4 years ... I've removed the icons for now (because I don't want to deal with co-owning the directories etc.), but once the icon theme is fixed, I'll add them back.

Anyhoo, thanks for the detailed review!

https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40570
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40571
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40572

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/elementary-tasks

Built for all current Fedora branches:

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-1b9f6d2ddf
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-c1ea6512f0
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cccea39e74