[Bug 228425] Review Request: gtkpod - Graphical song management program for Apple's iPod

[bugzilla at 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: Review Request: gtkpod - Graphical song management program for Apple's iPod
Alias: gtkpod-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228425





------- Additional Comments From tmz at pobox.com  2007-02-23 00:00 EST -------
No, vendor is not automatically generated for .desktop files.  Where did you get
this info (a link would be appreciated)?  The guidelines are quite clear on the
usage and the reasoning for it.  I think you must be confused about adding a
Vendor: tag/header to the specfile.  That (Vendor:) isn't required and indeed is
generated.

The vendor option to desktop-file-install is not.  Please edit the specfile to
remove the vendor option and try to build in mock.  You'll see an error like the
following at the desktop-file-install command:

+ desktop-file-install --mode 0644 --dir
/var/tmp/gtkpod-0.99.8-3.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications gtkpod.desktop
Must specify the vendor namespace for these files with --vendor

I did this with FC6 as the target, but I have no reason to expect it to be
different in development.  If you find that it is, please let me know.

I'm not sure what you mean about "--add-categorie" - I don't have that in the
spec file.  AFAIK, there are times when adding or removing categories from an
upstream .desktop file are needed, but that's irrelevant to this review.

If you want to get clarification on this, please do so in the thread on
fedora-packaging that I started so that I (and others) can be included in the
discussion.

Is there anything else that's holding up approval of this package?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.