Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1212318
Summary: | Review Request: golang-github-hashicorp-serf- Service orchestration and management tool http://www.serfdom.io | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jan Chaloupka <jchaloup> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Marek Skalický <mskalick> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | branto, mskalick, package-review |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | branto:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc21 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2015-07-30 00:40:11 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 1060502, 1211985, 1211990, 1212031, 1212047, 1212056, 1212065, 1212116, 1212124 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Jan Chaloupka
2015-04-16 07:19:04 UTC
Koji: package depends on bz1211985, bz1211990, bz1212031, bz1212047, bz1212056, bz1212116, bz1212065, bz1212124. golang-github-mitchellh-cli has repository (bz1060502) which is empty at the moment. Locally it builds fine. Notes: We could add surf package as well (as it is a tool). But I will wait until there is a request for it. Specfile conforms to current Go packaging draft [1]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go MUST items: - NON: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. -> I wasn't able to build it due to missing "golang(github.com/mitchellh/cli)" SHOULD items: - Latest version is not packed Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [-]: 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. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [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. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [!]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [-]: Package installs properly. [-]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. [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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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: [x]: 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). [x]: Package functions as described. [!]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. The package builds fine locally and passes the review, we are good to create dist-git repos -> setting fedora-review+ New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: golang-github-hashicorp-serf Short Description: Service orchestration and management tool http://www.serfdom.io Upstream URL: https://github.com/hashicorp/serf Owners: jchaloup Branches: f23 f22 f21 el6 InitialCC: golang-sig Git done (by process-git-requests). golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc22 golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc21 golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.el6 golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. golang-github-hashicorp-serf-0-0.1.git4bd6183.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. |