[Bug 527241] New: Review Request: libvtemm - C++ bindings for vte

[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.

Summary: Review Request: libvtemm - C++ bindings for vte

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527241

           Summary: Review Request: libvtemm - C++ bindings for vte
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: nobody at fedoraproject.org
        ReportedBy: qdlacz at gmail.com
         QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org
                CC: notting at redhat.com, fedora-package-review at redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
    Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: http://krnowak.fedorapeople.org/libvtemm.spec
SRPM URL: http://krnowak.fedorapeople.org/libvtemm12-0.22.0-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description: libvtemm provides a C++ interface to the VTE library.

spec file is based on gtkmm.spec from
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/gtkmm24/devel/gtkmm.spec?revision=1.57
(this is last revision).

package builds on koji on all architectures.

rpmlint output on spec (libvtemm.spec):
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


rpmlint output on srpm (libvtemm12-0.22.0-1.fc11.src.rpm):
libvtemm12.src: E: invalid-spec-name
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

Same error is displayed while checking gtkmm24 srpm. Should package be named
just libvtemm or spec renamed to libvtemm12 - its API version is 1.2. I left it
in this state just to be consistent with other *mm packages (gtkmm24,
glibmm24).


rpmlint output on main package (libvtemm12-0.22.0-1.fc12.i686.rpm):
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


rpmlint output on debuginfo package
(libvtemm12-debuginfo-0.22.0-1.fc12.i686.rpm):
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


rpmlint output on devel package (libvtemm12-devel-0.22.0-1.fc12.i686.rpm):
libvtemm12-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

I put all not installed documentation (AUTHORS, NEWS, ChangeLog and such) in
main package. API docs are in separate package. Maybe in later upstream release
of libvtemm example source codes will be distributed, so they would be put into
documentation of devel package.


rpmlint output on docs package (libvtemm12-docs-0.22.0-1.fc12.i686.rpm):
libvtemm12-docs.i686: E: devel-dependency libvtemm12-devel
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

Having API docs without devel package does not make much sense.
I only was wondering if moving whole API documentation to gtk-doc directory is
really necessary since recently mm packages provide their own .devhelp files,
so html documentation could reside in docdir being still viewable by devhelp.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.