Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nobody@fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com CC: rstrode@redhat.com
Fedora Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/desktop-file-utils/ Initial Owner: rstrode@redhat.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2007-02-02 15:15 EST ------- it's a little weird we BuildRequires: emacs. I'm not sure why we do that.
We should probably minimally make it a Requires: and probably move the .el file to a subpackage.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2007-02-02 15:18 EST ------- well, it's only one file, let's not bother making the subpackage for now.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2007-02-02 15:19 EST ------- (and drop the Requires: entirely)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2007-02-02 15:21 EST ------- there's some cruft:
# We don't want the vfs module yet /bin/rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/libmenu* /bin/rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sysconfdir}/gnome-vfs-2.0/modules/menu-modules.conf
I have no idea what that's about, but I'm dropping it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2007-02-02 15:22 EST ------- We don't install any .desktop files from desktop-file-utils, so it doesn't make sense to call update-desktop-database from it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2007-02-02 15:51 EST ------- So it looks like we have to keep the emacs buildrequires to generate the .elc file.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review?
------- Additional Comments From panemade@gmail.com 2007-10-18 02:57 EST ------- 1) packaging guidelines suggests use of make as http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-525c7d76890cb22df33b...
2) good to use %defattr(-,root,root,-)
3) Do you want to solve following rpmlint messages? desktop-file-utils.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided desktop-file-validator desktop-file-utils.src:16: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes desktop-file-validator
4) I saw new upstream release. you will like to update source. Update package. Better to provide new SPEC and SRPM links for this package before actually committing in CVS.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |panemade@gmail.com Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO Flag| |needinfo?(rstrode@redhat.com | |)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide
panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ajax@redhat.com
------- Additional Comments From panemade@gmail.com 2008-01-11 07:19 EST ------- Do anyone care to provide updates here? I see so many co-owners for this package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |notting@redhat.com, fedora- | |package-review@redhat.com AssignedTo|panemade@gmail.com |nobody@fedoraproject.org QAContact|fedora-package- |extras-qa@fedoraproject.org |review@redhat.com | Flag|fedora-review? |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
rstrode@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?(rstrode@redhat.com| |) |
------- Additional Comments From rstrode@redhat.com 2008-03-19 10:07 EST ------- I've dropped the Obsoletes: desktop-file-validator That's just legacy cruft.
desktop-file-utils is already in cvs. this review is just a post core merge review.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
Adam Jackson ajax@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|ajax@redhat.com | Customer Facing|NO |---
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus@free.fr
--- Comment #10 from Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr 2008-10-17 14:07:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9)
desktop-file-utils is already in cvs. this review is just a post core merge review.
What does this exactly means? This package hasn't been reviewed already, it may not meet the criteria for inclusion in fedora.
* does desktop-mime-type.prov really belong to that package? Looks like it should better be in redhat-rpm-config.
* there are emacs guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Emacs
* the following comment is strange, certainly a leftover: # https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12018
* please don't mention GNOME and KDE in description, better use freedesktop or the like. All the window manager in fedora I know about use the .desktop files to create their menu.
* Is there a reason why %_smp_mflag isn't used?
* the source archive timestamp isn't kept, it is too late now, but please keep it next time -rw-rw-r-- 1 dumas dumas 348871 Feb 11 2008 desktop-file-utils-0.15.tar.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 dumas dumas 348871 Mar 4 2008 desktop-file-utils-0.15.tar.gz-old
* source match upstream 2fe8ebe222fc33cd4a959415495b7eed desktop-file-utils-0.15.tar.gz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #11 from Ray Strode rstrode@redhat.com 2008-10-17 15:03:22 EDT --- desktop-file-utils is already included in fedora.
Feel free to commit fixes for minor packaging issues you find with it. The ACL should be open on the package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #12 from Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr 2008-10-17 18:21:06 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=320728) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=320728) file spec patch to implement request of the review
Please review and tell me if you want the whole patch to be applied. If yes I'll apply and rebuild, if no, please apply what you want.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #13 from Ray Strode rstrode@redhat.com 2008-10-18 00:43:24 EDT --- Everything looks good but removing the .prov file. If you think it should go in redhat-rpm-config or whatever, we should get it there first before taking it out here.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #14 from Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr 2008-10-25 09:28:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13)
Everything looks good but removing the .prov file. If you think it should go in redhat-rpm-config or whatever, we should get it there first before taking it out here.
Please submit it to redhat-rpm-config then, I'd prefer if you do it, since redhat-rpm-config are not very responsive to me.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
Ray Strode rstrode@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |468701
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #15 from Ray Strode rstrode@redhat.com 2008-10-27 11:01:34 EDT --- filed Bug 468701
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
Bug 225681 depends on bug 468701, which changed state.
Bug 468701 Summary: desktop-mime-type.prov should be in redhat-rpm-config. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468701
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #16 from Parag AN(पराग) panemade@gmail.com 2010-09-27 06:21:54 EDT --- Created attachment 449859 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=449859 spec cleanup
halfline, I think we have now official emacs guidelines. I have used them and added emacs addons subpackages here.
Can you please check attached patch if it looks good to commit so that this will get cleaned up?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
--- Comment #17 from Ray Strode [halfline] rstrode@redhat.com 2010-09-28 09:32:24 EDT --- looks fine, feel free to commit it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225681
Parag AN(पराग) panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED CC| |panemade@gmail.com Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |panemade@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review+ Last Closed| |2010-10-12 00:34:52
--- Comment #18 from Parag AN(पराग) panemade@gmail.com 2010-10-12 00:34:52 EDT --- Thanks. I have committed above patch and built new package desktop-file-utils-0.16-2.fc15
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org