[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #21 from Till Hofmann --- I reopened https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509679 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Viktor Ashirov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vashi...@redhat.com Flags|needinfo?(ignatenko@redhat. |needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ |com)|gmail.com) --- Comment #20 from Viktor Ashirov --- I'd like to see rofi in Fedora someday. Igor, Till, any updates on this? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Blocks||201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2018-07-20 04:39:11 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/HLAQKTDVEFCXNG5QHKEQT7CVE4IUC3KL/
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #19 from Till Hofmann --- This review seems to be stalled. @Igor, are you still interested in this package? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OYTURJJ7234ANGZUWXBYIOPCJ33WNSST/
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(ignatenko@redhat. ||com) --- Comment #18 from Till Hofmann --- Igor, what's the status here? I would submit another review request if you're no longer interested in / have time to packaging rofi. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2QEMNZ5VCIRNED4DJDSCUPG3BKS4GWUN/
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #17 from Till Maas --- Igor, would you please add the BR for bison? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/TOERSNT6EVSZQC2ZXN34LVLSIDCAPGJR/
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #16 from Till Hofmann --- To be more elaborate, the build fails with: > checking for bison... no > checking for byacc... no > BUILDSTDERR: configure: error: "Failed to find bison" -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #15 from Till Hofmann --- You're missing BR: bison -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Till Maas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|opensou...@till.name|thofm...@fedoraproject.org Flags|needinfo?(opensource@till.n | |ame)| --- Comment #14 from Till Maas --- Hey Till, thank you for your offer, please take it from here. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(opensource@till.n ||ame) --- Comment #13 from Till Hofmann --- What's the status here? Till, are you still working on the review? I can help out with the review if you want. It would be nice to see rofi in Fedora :) -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #11 from Igor Gnatenko --- https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rofi.spec https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rofi-1.4.2-1.fc28.src.rpm -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #12 from Igor Gnatenko --- *** Bug 1509679 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #10 from Igor Gnatenko --- Or, rather, now. Working on it. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Igor Gnatenko changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(ignatenko@redhat. | |com)| --- Comment #9 from Igor Gnatenko --- > - The guidelines now seemt to require an outline for the licenses Will add. > - The checks are ignored instead and the upstream bug is closed While I agree running check is good, I don't really have time to work on it now.. > - The timestamps of the files modified in %prep are not preserved I don't think this is really issue, no one preserves timestamps unfortunately. > If it's still active, I'll close mine in favor of yours. I would like to get it finally done. So now I promise that I will fix all issues next week! -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 Till Hofmann changed: What|Removed |Added CC||till.hofm...@posteo.de Flags||needinfo?(ignatenko@redhat. ||com) --- Comment #8 from Till Hofmann --- Is this still active? I just submitted #1509679 without realizing that there was already a review request for rofi. If it's still active, I'll close mine in favor of yours. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761
--- Comment #7 from Till Maas ---
Sorry for the delay on my side this time :-/
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
Unfortunately there are still some issues: :-/
- The guidelines now seemt to require an outline for the licenses
- The checks are ignored instead and the upstream bug is closed
- The timestamps of the files modified in %prep are not preserved
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[X]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
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.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
Please add a comment like:
# MIT: rofi
# Public Domain: rofi-sensible-terminal rofi-theme-selector
[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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 4 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rofi-
debuginfo
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
The tests are ignored and the upstream bug reporst is closed due to inactivity
[!]: Packages shou
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #6 from Igor Gnatenko --- Sorry for long delay, SPEC: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rofi.spec SRPM: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rofi-1.3.1-1.fc26.src.rpm -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761
Till Maas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Till Maas ---
I found three issues but they should be easy to fix AFAICS.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- There seeem to be tests in the directory test, but there is no %check
section.
- The executable bit should be removed:
rofi.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/rofi/Examples/i3_switch_workspaces.sh
- The rofi-sensible-terminal script contains a public domain header, this is
not mentioned in the License:-tag in the spec file (add "and Public Domain")
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[X]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[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.
[X]: 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.
[X]: 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.
[X]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 4 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original i
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #4 from Igor Gnatenko --- SPEC: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rofi.spec SRPM: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rofi-1.2.0-1.fc26.src.rpm Fixed all above and updated to 1.2.0. Also fixed couple of rpmlint complaints. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #3 from Till Maas --- Also there is a newer upstream release: 1.2.0 And the upstream page says it needs a new maintainer :-( -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761
--- Comment #2 from Till Maas ---
- The SRPM URL does not work, the rofi directory does not exist at
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/region51/
- It would be better to use %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1* instead of
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.* as a pattern for the manpage to make it also work
if manpages are not compressed.
--
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1396761] Review Request: rofi - A window switcher, run dialog and dmenu replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396761 --- Comment #1 from Igor Gnatenko --- *** Bug 1277260 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
