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 1390595 - Review Request: librdkafka - The Apache Kafka C Library
Summary: Review Request: librdkafka - The Apache Kafka C Library
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1394275
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-NEEDSPONSOR
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-11-01 13:40 UTC by Derek Ditch
Modified: 2016-12-08 16:22 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-12-08 16:22:30 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Derek Ditch 2016-11-01 13:40:59 UTC 
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/edenhill/librdkafka/master/packaging/rpm/librdkafka.spec
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dcode/rocknsm/epel-7-x86_64/00472037-librdkafka/librdkafka-0.9.2-1.el7.centos.src.rpm
Description: librdkafka is the C/C++ client library implementation of the Apache Kafka protocol, containing both Producer and Consumer support.
Fedora Account System Username: dcode

This is my first package submission, so I need a sponsor. I am not the upstream maintainer, but I frequently use, build, and develop with this package for my project ROCK NSM (http://rocknsm.io).

The SPEC file requires definition of the macros __version and __release, which I defined in my SRPM that I used for my build for EL7 and F25 (https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/dcode/rocknsm/build/472037/). Ultimately, my goal is to get this into EPEL, but most of the packages that I use will work just fine on Fedora too, so I'll submit parallel builds going forward.
Comment 1 Piotr Popieluch 2016-11-19 00:36:22 UTC 
I'm interested in having librdkafka in Fedora and EPEL. I'm no sponsor so I can't sponsor you, but I can help you with this package.

When doing a review, the reviewers use fedora-review -b which automates some tasks. F-R downloads the files from the urls in the bugreport, builds the packge and runs some tests. Please make sure "fedora-review -b 1390595" builds correctly. rpmlint might be helpful too.

To become sponsored, you will have to do a couple unofficial reviews to show you understand the package guidelines [1]. You can post the urls to those reviews here.

Some comments: 
version/release needs to be defined in the uploaded specfile.
Group tag is deprecated, remove it unless you still want to support EL5 (which will EOL soon).
License tag must match the short license as listed in [2]
Source needs to specify the upstream source url. [3]
BuildRoot tag is deprecated (unless EL5 support)
description needs to be wrapped at 80 chars
requires for rhel >=7 is openssl-libs, I would expect this to be the same for Fedora (didn't check)
%clean is deprecated
don't rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install
%build you will probably want to define CFLAGS='%{optflags} to have all default options and hardening.
%doc, put license files in %license, not %doc.
Why is the permission set to 444 in %files?

 
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL
Comment 2 Radovan Sroka 2016-11-22 12:59:45 UTC 
There is another finished review for this package: 1394275, so this review can be closed. I add that reviewed package into the fedora repository, but not into EPEL. librdkafka will most likely be in next RHEL7.
Comment 3 Piotr Popieluch 2016-11-22 14:13:12 UTC 
(In reply to Radovan Sroka from comment #2)
> There is another finished review for this package: 1394275, so this review
> can be closed. I add that reviewed package into the fedora repository, but
> not into EPEL. librdkafka will most likely be in next RHEL7.

Good to hear. With "next" do you mean current 7.3 beta or next 7.4? If it will be 7.4 it would be nice if EPEL7 would provide it for the time being.
Comment 4 Derek Ditch 2016-11-22 20:24:50 UTC 
Radovan, thanks for the update. That review was submitted after I submitted this one. I do need this package in EPEL if possible until it is included upstream. There are other packages that I'd like to submit but they depend on librdkafka.
Comment 5 Michael Schwendt 2016-12-08 16:22:30 UTC 
I advise comparing the spec files for the two packages. This one contains a multitude of packaging mistakes. It would have needed a lot of work to get it through the review process.


> When doing a review, the reviewers use fedora-review -b
> which automates some tasks.

Packagers ought to do that, too.

"fedora-review -b 1390595" would try to retrieve the latest spec file and src.rpm package from this ticket, perform local test builds and run lots of checks on the result.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1394275 ***
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.