Fridolin, Jan, could you please run some gofed magic on this to package up its deps :D ? I'll be happy to review those packages :)

I still stand by my hatred for golang deps, but whatever needed to make everyone happy :)

Upstream: https://github.com/opencontainers/runc

a quick look at godeps.json tells me most of them are packaged already, apart from opencontainers/specs.

$ pwd
.../runc-90e6d3763e917ca0d6c24c63c07320f0424fcd0c/Godeps
$ gofed check-deps -v
package golang-github-Sirupsen-logrus has newer commit
package golang-github-codegangsta-cli outdated
package golang-github-coreos-go-systemd outdated
package golang-github-godbus-dbus outdated
package golang-googlecode-goprotobuf has newer commit
import path github.com/opencontainers/specs not found
package golang-github-syndtr-gocapability has newer commit

runc-90e6d3763e917ca0d6c24c63c07320f0424fcd0c]$ gofed ggi -dcv
Class: github.com/Sirupsen/logrus (golang-github-Sirupsen-logrus) PkgDB=True
Class: github.com/coreos/go-systemd (golang-github-coreos-go-systemd) PkgDB=True
Class: github.com/docker/docker (docker) PkgDB=True
Class: github.com/godbus/dbus (golang-github-godbus-dbus) PkgDB=True
Class: github.com/golang/protobuf (golang-googlecode-goprotobuf) PkgDB=True
Class: github.com/opencontainers/runc (golang-github-opencontainers-runc) PkgDB=False
Class: github.com/syndtr/gocapability (golang-github-syndtr-gocapability) PkgDB=True

golang-github-codegangsta-cli, golang-github-coreos-go-systemd and golang-github-godbus-dbus need to get updated.

github.com/opencontainers/specs is not packaged in Fedora as you wrote.

Mark, if you don't mind I would replace your spec file mine. It is generated with spec-2.0 with support for secondary architectures, unit-test subpackage, minimal devel subpackage and debug info.

At the moment I am still working on building binaries with debug info for secondary architectures. So I will sent another update of the spec file soon.

Spec URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/golang-github-opencontainers-runc/golang-github-opencontainers-runc.spec

SRPM URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/golang-github-opencontainers-runc/golang-github-opencontainers-runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.src.rpm

Jan: I am perfectly happy to let you pick this up and run with it.  I started because I want it for testing and evaluation and especially for embedding in container hosts such as Project Atomic or CoreOS.

Would you want to take ownership of the ticket as well?

- Mark

golang-github-coreos-go-systemd updated [1]. Yet, not in updates/buildroot override due to update of bodhi to 2.0.

[1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10764593

What ticket? Please :)

This one.... You're welcome to proceed and it won't hurt my feelings at all.  It will likely get a better result faster than if I proceed.

- Mark

I will. Thanks for heads up.

Spec URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/runc/runc.spec

SRPM URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/runc/runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.src.rpm

Description: CLI for running Open Containers

Fedora Account System Username: jchaloup

$ rpmlint runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.src.rpm runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.x86_64.rpm runc-devel-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.noarch.rpm runc-unit-test-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.x86_64.rpm runc-debuginfo-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.x86_64.rpm
runc.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary runc
runc-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, thuggish
runc-unit-test.x86_64: E: devel-dependency runc-devel
runc-unit-test.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, thuggish
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.

Koji: it depends on bz#1255370 which is on review. Locally it builds fine.

Some info about spec file:
- spec file version 2.0
- support for secondary architectures
- support for CI testing (unit-test subpackage)
- minimal devel subpackage
- debug info for both primary and secondary architectures

Notes: "E: devel-dependency runc-devel" can be ignored, as unit-test subpackage depends on/test on source codes provided by the devel subpackage.

Nalin, the spec file is ready for review.

Looks pretty good to me. Here's the checklist from fedora-review, with a few items that I'd like to know more about (search for "[ ]" and "[!]"):

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[X]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[X]: Package contains no static executables.
[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.
 Package license is ASL 2.0.
[X]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 No patches are applied, and the bundled license text is that of ASL 2.0, which is in line with the opencontainers charter.
[X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
 Except for the debuginfo, of course.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Subdirectories under /usr/share/gocode that aren't owned by golang or the opencontainer-specs package should be owned by this package so that its removal doesn't leave empties around.
     Note: No known owner of
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/system,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups/systemd,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/selinux,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/seccomp,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/configs,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/stacktrace,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups/fs,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/label,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/netlink,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/devices,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/configs/validate,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/utils,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/nsenter,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/criurpc,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/xattr,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/user,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/integration,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/apparmor
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners:
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/system,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/utils,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/configs/validate,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/nsenter,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups/systemd,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/selinux,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/label,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/netlink,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/criurpc,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/configs,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/seccomp,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/xattr,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/stacktrace,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/integration,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups/fs,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/user,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/devices,
     /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/apparmor
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
 Might want to add a comment about the -B flag here, for people like me who didn't know that it tells the go linker to embed a build ID note in the binary.
[X]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
  It's customary to use a person's full name where the changelog currently lists a Fedora account name.  It's not a blocker, but my guess is it's an oversight.
[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.
 There's no date in the release field, so the Y in 0.Y.gitshortcommit.disttag will need to be manually incremented to keep the sorting order correct.
[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.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
 The runc-devel package appears to be missing a requires on "golang(github.com/opencontainers/specs)", which is imported by multiple parts of libcontainer.
[X]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 92160 bytes in 12 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
 The runc command should (eventually) have a manual page.
 The package description should be more than just a copy of the summary.
[ ]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
 Missing BuildRequires on "golang(github.com/opencontainers/specs)" (from bug #1255370) and "golang(github.com/codegangsta/cli)".
[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 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:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[-]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Whether runc-devel or runc-unit-test should depend on the same version of runc isn't really clear to me, since there aren't any dangling symlinks if they don't.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in runc-
     devel, runc-unit-test
[!]: 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]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[X]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
 Why is copying() defined using %define rather than %global?
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc24.x86_64.rpm
          runc-devel-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc24.noarch.rpm
          runc-unit-test-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc24.x86_64.rpm
          runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc24.src.rpm
runc.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary runc
runc-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub
runc-unit-test.x86_64: E: devel-dependency runc-devel
runc-unit-test.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: runc-debuginfo-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc24.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
runc.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary runc
runc-unit-test.x86_64: E: devel-dependency runc-devel
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.



Requires
--------
runc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

runc-unit-test (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    runc-devel

runc-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    golang(github.com/Sirupsen/logrus)
    golang(github.com/coreos/go-systemd/dbus)
    golang(github.com/coreos/go-systemd/util)
    golang(github.com/docker/docker/pkg/mount)
    golang(github.com/docker/docker/pkg/symlink)
    golang(github.com/docker/docker/pkg/units)
    golang(github.com/godbus/dbus)
    golang(github.com/golang/protobuf/proto)
    golang(github.com/syndtr/gocapability/capability)



Provides
--------
runc:
    runc
    runc(x86-64)

runc-unit-test:
    runc-unit-test
    runc-unit-test(x86-64)

runc-devel:
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/apparmor)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups/fs)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/cgroups/systemd)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/configs)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/configs/validate)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/criurpc)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/devices)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/integration)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/label)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/netlink)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/nsenter)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/seccomp)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/selinux)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/stacktrace)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/system)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/user)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/utils)
    golang(github.com/opencontainers/runc/libcontainer/xattr)
    runc-devel



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/archive/90e6d3763e917ca0d6c24c63c07320f0424fcd0c/runc-90e6d37.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : dabe7334b037a66298338832a3a9739eed91bb3e8f21ccf8f48182d51c4a11bf
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : dabe7334b037a66298338832a3a9739eed91bb3e8f21ccf8f48182d51c4a11bf


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n runc -m runc
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Jan is already in the packagers group, removing this from the list of FE-NEEDSPONSOR bugs.

> [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
> Subdirectories under /usr/share/gocode that aren't owned by golang or the
> opencontainer-specs package should be owned by this package so that its 
> removal doesn't leave empties around.

Spec file updated. All directories are owned by devel subpackage. As user could update a devel subpackage without updating unit-test, both packages could end up owning the same directory. So no directories owned by unit-test.

> [ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
>  Might want to add a comment about the -B flag here, for people like me who 
> didn't know that it tells the go linker to embed a build ID note in the
> binary.

Described in Packaging Draft [1].

> [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
>  It's customary to use a person's full name where the changelog currently
> lists a Fedora account name.  It's not a blocker, but my guess is it's an
> oversight.

Updated.

> [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
>  The runc-devel package appears to be missing a requires on 
> "golang(github.com/opencontainers/specs)", which is imported by multiple
> parts of libcontainer.

$ gofed ggi --all-occurrences --show-occurrence | grep github.com/opencontainers/specs
github.com/opencontainers/specs (spec.go:main, restore.go:main, utils.go:main, run.go:main)

github.com/opencontainers/specs is used only in main packages. These are not to be imported by other packages.

> [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
> The runc command should (eventually) have a manual page.

Definitely. 

> The package description should be more than just a copy of the summary.

At the moment I don't see any description that would be explaining enough what runc is. If you have an idea what description is suitable, please. I will update the spec file accordingly. 

> [ ]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
>     one supported primary architecture.
> Missing BuildRequires on "golang(github.com/opencontainers/specs)" (from bug
> #1255370) and "golang(github.com/codegangsta/cli)".

Updated. Thanks. This is not included in the spec file generator. I will update the generator as well.

> [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> Whether runc-devel or runc-unit-test should depend on the same version of
> runc isn't really clear to me, since there aren't any dangling symlinks if
> they don't.
>     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in 
>     runc-devel, runc-unit-test

Neither devel nor unit-test depends on runc.

> [!]: Latest version is packaged.

By the time of generating the spec file, the commit was the latest one.

> [ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
>  Why is copying() defined using %define rather than %global?

Because copying is a parametric macro which needs to be evaluated in the time of use. As a global, it would be evaluated in the time of definition end up with empty %license macro.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go
=========================

Spec URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/runc/runc.spec

SRPM URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/runc/runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.src.rpm

For missing BuildRequires https://github.com/ingvagabund/gofed/issues/28

(In reply to Jan Chaloupka from comment #15)
> > [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
> > Subdirectories under /usr/share/gocode that aren't owned by golang or the
> > opencontainer-specs package should be owned by this package so that its 
> > removal doesn't leave empties around.
> 
> Spec file updated. All directories are owned by devel subpackage. As user
> could update a devel subpackage without updating unit-test, both packages
> could end up owning the same directory. So no directories owned by unit-test.

Thanks!

> > [ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
> >  Might want to add a comment about the -B flag here, for people like me who 
> > didn't know that it tells the go linker to embed a build ID note in the
> > binary.
> 
> Described in Packaging Draft [1].

Ah, okay, works for me.

> > [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
> >  It's customary to use a person's full name where the changelog currently
> > lists a Fedora account name.  It's not a blocker, but my guess is it's an
> > oversight.
> 
> Updated.

Great!

> > [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
> >  The runc-devel package appears to be missing a requires on 
> > "golang(github.com/opencontainers/specs)", which is imported by multiple
> > parts of libcontainer.
> 
> $ gofed ggi --all-occurrences --show-occurrence | grep
> github.com/opencontainers/specs
> github.com/opencontainers/specs (spec.go:main, restore.go:main,
> utils.go:main, run.go:main)
> 
> github.com/opencontainers/specs is used only in main packages. These are not
> to be imported by other packages.

Whoops, you're right - no idea what made me think that was used internally.

> > [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
> > The runc command should (eventually) have a manual page.
> 
> Definitely. 
> 
> > The package description should be more than just a copy of the summary.
> 
> At the moment I don't see any description that would be explaining enough
> what runc is. If you have an idea what description is suitable, please. I
> will update the spec file accordingly. 

Possibly "The runc command can be used to start containers which are packaged in accordance with the Open Container Initiative's specifications, and to manage containers running under runc.", or something that includes more of the details from the web site or runc's --help output.

> > [ ]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
> >     one supported primary architecture.
> > Missing BuildRequires on "golang(github.com/opencontainers/specs)" (from bug
> > #1255370) and "golang(github.com/codegangsta/cli)".
> 
> Updated. Thanks. This is not included in the spec file generator. I will
> update the generator as well.

Great!
 
> > [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> > Whether runc-devel or runc-unit-test should depend on the same version of
> > runc isn't really clear to me, since there aren't any dangling symlinks if
> > they don't.
> >     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in 
> >     runc-devel, runc-unit-test
> 
> Neither devel nor unit-test depends on runc.

Okay.  

> > [!]: Latest version is packaged.
> 
> By the time of generating the spec file, the commit was the latest one.

Understood.

> > [ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
> >  Why is copying() defined using %define rather than %global?
> 
> Because copying is a parametric macro which needs to be evaluated in the
> time of use. As a global, it would be evaluated in the time of definition
> end up with empty %license macro.

Are you sure that's necessary here?  When I try changing it, the files show up in the right place with the right file flags in the binary packages.

> > > The package description should be more than just a copy of the summary.
> > 
> > At the moment I don't see any description that would be explaining enough
> > what runc is. If you have an idea what description is suitable, please. I
> > will update the spec file accordingly. 
> 
> Possibly "The runc command can be used to start containers which are packaged
> in accordance with the Open Container Initiative's specifications, and to
> manage containers running under runc.", or something that includes more of the
> details from the web site or runc's --help output.

Updated.

> > > [ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
> > >  Why is copying() defined using %define rather than %global?
> > 
> > Because copying is a parametric macro which needs to be evaluated in the
> > time of use. As a global, it would be evaluated in the time of definition
> > end up with empty %license macro.
>
> Are you sure that's necessary here?  When I try changing it, the files
> show up in the right place with the right file flags in the binary packages.

copying parametric macro completely removed. Replaced with:
{!?_licensedir:%global license %doc}

Spec URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/runc/runc.spec

SRPM URL: https://jchaloup.fedorapeople.org/reviews/runc/runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc20.src.rpm

In addition I have:
- modified ExclusiveArch and BuildRequires in a top of the spec file
- removed ExclusiveArch from unit-test subpackage and modified BuildRequires
- removed definition of gobuild and gotest functions from %build and %check and replaced them with new %gobuild and %gotest macros defined in go-compilers packages (brought by compiler(go-compiler) BR)

Moving the conditional definition of %license to the top along with the rest of the global macro definitions would make it easier to spot.  Otherwise looks good to me.  Setting 'fedora-review' flag to '+'.

Thanks Nalin. %license can not be moved to the top. It must be defined after License tag, otherwise the tag is used instead of the macro. So the best place for it is before %files section for which it is intended.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: runc
Short Description: CLI for running Open Containers
Upstream URL: https://github.com/opencontainers/runc
Owners: jchaloup
Branches: f23 f22 f21 el6 epel7
InitialCC: golang-sig

Git done (by process-git-requests).

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-8152

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc21 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 21. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-16227

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-16228

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-16229

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update runc'
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-16229

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update runc'
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-16227

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update runc'
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-16228

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update runc'
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-8152

runc-0.2-0.2.git90e6d37.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.