https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231215

Kalev Lember <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|[email protected]    |[email protected]
                 CC|                            |[email protected]
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #2 from Kalev Lember <[email protected]> ---
Taking for review.


> Release:      1

This is missing the dist tag, 1%{?dist}


> BuildRequires: python3-devel
> BuildRequires: python3-setuptools

A tiny nit: there's something wrong with whitespace and it doesn't align up
with what comes before. I think maybe the rest uses tabs and there's a space
here.


> %description hub
> Flatpak plugin for the Koji XMLRPC hub

I think the convention is to use a full stop at the end of description
sentences.


> %files
> %license COPYING
> %doc README.md

I wonder if it would be better to call this koji-flatpak-data or something? It
could be a bit confusing if 'dnf install koji-flatpak' results in just a readme
and license file. It would also work to have '%license COPYING' duplicated for
all the subpackages and just get rid of the -data subpackage altogether. Not
sure if it would be better that way or not :)


Another question I have is about the plugin subpackage naming. As I understand
it, koji-flatpak-hub is a plugin for koji-hub, koji-flatpak-builder is a plugin
for koji-builder, and koji-flatpak-cli is a plugin for koji. If I look at the
plugins shipped in the koji srpm, e.g.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2242604 they seem to use
a bit different naming. How about something like this to have a bit of
consistency with the existing plugins:

koji-hub-plugin-flatpak instead of koji-flatpak-hub
koji-builder-plugin-flatpak instead of koji-flatpak-builder
python3-koji-cli-plugin-flatpak instead of koji-flatpak-cli

What do you think? I really don't want to bikeshed over naming too much, just
wanted to point that out quickly. None if this (with maybe the exception of the
dist tag) is a review blocker in my opinion.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2231215

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202231215%23c2
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to