https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035222
--- Comment #24 from Maxwell G <gotmax(a)e.email> ---
Maybe I'm a bit nitpicky, but I do I have a couple suggestions to improve your
package. Although I'm not the reviewer, I noticed some problems and figured I'd
point them out.
%global gittag 0.10.0
%global srpm_version 0.10.0
What's the point of this? Why don't you just set `Version: 0.10.0` and use
`%{version}` instead of these redundant macros?
BuildRequires:
gcc-c++,cmake,ninja-build,boost-devel,spdlog-devel,llvm-devel,lld-devel,git
I would recommend splitting this into one `BuildRequires: PACKAGENAME` line for
each dependency, preferably alphabetized. This way, the specfile and its git
diffs are more readable.
Please use the %cmake macros. You can consult
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CMake/ for how to use
them.
You should not use globs in %files for shared directories[1].
[1]:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_explicit_lists
Please take a look at
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_downstream_so....
The way you've versioned the .so does not look correct to me.
The devel subpackage should depend on the base package. Take a look at
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_requiring_bas....
Once you do this, you can remove the duplicated `%license` and `%doc` lines
from the devel subpackage.
License: ASL 2.0 and CC0
You must include a licensing breakdown, as per
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidel....
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035222