https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1317939
--- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> ---
(In reply to Benji Wiebe from comment #2)
Thanks for taking the time to look at this...
Description: See if you like the new description better. The acronyms are
what most users would recognize, so I left them in, but added some more
words to make it plainer for those who aren't familiar with it.
The Summary is
great: concise yet understandable (for somebody like me
who has no idea what this package does).
But %description should be a bit longer: what can you do with this package,
what is the output, is special hardware required, etc. Doesn't have to be
exhaustive, one paragraph is enough.
Consider that users who have no idea are sometimes looking for something
in a list of hundreds and hundreds packages and you cannot assume that
they have any area knowledge (the description is not only to let people
use your package, quite often it is to let people know that your package
is not useful for them).
Version: Using the format YYYYMMDDgitSHORTCOMMIT now.
Yep, that
looks good.
BuildRequires/Requires are now split out onto separate lines.
What you said about diffability makes good sense.
During review it is customary to bump the revision after major changes,
add stuff to %changelog, and upload the SRPM under a new name. The
spec file is updated in place.
This way it's possible for the review to go back and look at the
previous version.
For Systemd, I'm not sure I've got it right yet. I had been
going off
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd#Packaging but apparently
that is out-of-date information?
I don't think it's out-of-date, just
slightly dated ;).
There are parts which talk about old Fedora, but it correctly mentions
what applies to newer versions.
The default ownership of %{_datarootdir}/%{name} and
%{_datarootdir}/%{name}/public_html looks correct to me. It show be owned by
root:root and everyone should have read permissions but not write
permissions.
I meant rpm package ownership. Your package creates those directories so it
should own them.
Also I removed the two Requires:, as they were unnecessary. Good
ol' rpmlint.
Hm, I don't remember what those were. That's why it's
helpful to keep
old srpms accessible.
--
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